On this page
-
Text (3)
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
odour and colour , as seek to transfuse from one language to another the creations of a poet . A good illustration is afforded us by some translations of Tennyson in a recent article in the Revue des Deux Mondes . "We will quote a verse or two : —
Untitled Article
" Is it well td wish thee happy ? Having known meto decline On a range of lower feelings and a narrower heart than mine . Yet it Bhall be : thou shalt lower to his level day by day , " What is fine within thee growing coarse , to sympathize with clay . " This is faithfully enough rendered : —
' Dois-je souhaiter que tu sois heureuse , qu apr 6 s m ' avoir connu tu te degrades dans une atmosphere < Taffections plus etroite * et de sentimens plus bas que les miens . Pourtant cela sera . Tu t ' abaisseras de jour en jour a son niveau . Ce que est raffine en toi * ' abrutira pour sympathiser avec la mature . " No one can find fault with that as a translation , but who does not feel the immensity of the abysm between it and the original ? Mark this : — ' ¦ ** ' As the husband is the wife is : thou art mated with a clown , And the grossness of his nature will have weight to drag thee down . "
Thus rendered : — " Tel mari telle femme . Tu t ' es alliee a . la vulgarite ; elle sera comme un poids pour te courber vers la terre . " Having carefully compared these specimens , and made yourself aware of the inadequacy of the French to create anything of the emotion created by the original , you will , perhaps , be able to understand the reason why Faust in translation seems so inferior to its reputation .
Untitled Article
SOCIALISM IN THE QUARTERLIES . fhe North British Review , No . XXX . Art .: " The Social Science . " Hamilton , Adams , and Co . The British Quarterly Review , No . XXVII . Art . : " Human Progression ; " and Art . : " Thoughts on the Labour Question . " Jackson and Walford . Socialism is daily ceasing- to be less and less of a word of terror , and becoming more and more an object of philosophic investigation . Men begin to feel that the old stereotyped objections betray feebleness of mind in those who give them vent ; , hey become ashamed of the traditional twaddJe .
itarted and repeated by those who had never trou-> led themselves to investigate the subject ; they withdraw from general circulation the epithets of nfamy , and leave it to the high-minded Paris Corespondent of the Times to quote examples of / ulgar every-day dishonesty , " as illustrative of Socialist theories . " Socialism is a " great fact . " Je it beneficent or be maleficent—surrounded by . irs from heaven or blasts from hell , bo its intents I vicked or charitable , man must speak to it . Abuse vill no longer avail . Arguments must be refuted » r accepted .
Among the foremost organs of serious opinion / e recognize the Reviews named at the head of his article ; and it has given uh considerable satisaction to observe the attention they have accorded 0 the discussion of Social theories , during the last wo years . If we select the current numbers lor pecial notice , it is because we wish to bring for-/ ard one consideration generally overlooked by / riters , or , if not overlooked , nevertheless in-. dequately treated , viz ., that Social Science implies Social Life as an existence superior to all individual xisteneies ; or , in other words , that there is Iluoanity , as a living organism , of which human > eings are the component parts ; and this Humanity 1 the object of a science different from all other cienccs , though dependent on them .
With some , Association or Cooperation is Soialism ; with others , the " Rational System " of liminating the soul altogether as a vital force ; , and cknowledging only the " force of circiun . stanees-, " rid Association grafted thereon , is Socialism ; with ¦ them , the satisfaction of the appetites ; with thex' 8 , general spoliation and the Liiuniph of
narchy by means of barricades—all these diverse leanings an ; attributed to Socialism by men asuming the oflicu of critics and teachers , and do in oine rude way indicate , though in caricature , the ivcrnity of the Socialist Schemes . Hut as we have ; ftcn said , Socialism in not dependent upon oeialist Schemes ; no more than Metaphysics an bt 5 said to be dependent upon any of the various choola . A Socialist is not de facto a follower of
St . Simon , Owen , Fourier , Proudhon , Louis Blanc , or Kingsley ; nor is a Metaphysician necessarily a believer in Locke , Kant , Hume , Reid , or Hegel . The man who believes in the possibility of a science of Metaphysics , and strives in some way to discover its fundamental propositions , is a Metaphysician ; the man who believes in the possibility of Social Science , and strives to discover its laws and applications , is a Socialist . If some Socialists take meagre views of the subject , and imagine that the organization of labour embraces it all , although it embraces but a small section ; so , likewise , do Metaphysicians often confine themselves to one section , and proclaim it paramount .
There is a vague yet powerful sentiment underlying all Socialist speculations , which must be brought forward into the distinctness of a formula . The sentiment we speak of is that of Humanity , of mutual interdependence , of Fraternity . It expresses itself in the word " Cooperation , " as opposed to "Competition "—brotherhood , not antagonism . It expresses itself , also , in the words
" nationality , " and " solidarity of the Peoples . It is the recognition , dim perhaps , yet forcible , of the sublime conception of Humanity as the living reality of this world—the conception of Society as the highest form of our collective life , which , without destroying individual life , completes it by enabling us to live in others . Against * the old egotistic Competitive formula , Each for-himself and God for us all , it raises up this nobler formula , Each for himself and for all .
We anticipate the sneer which will pass over some lips at this " mystical notion , " and hasten to assure the reader that it is as scientific a conception as almost any that he may entertain . Sentiment may underlie it , but Science accepts it as a positive generalization . With more or less clearness multitudinous thinkers have indicated it ; and when we state that Auguste Comte makes it the basis of all
social science , we have assured the reader that " mysticism" is the last quality to be predicated of it . The opening article of both the British and North British Reviews is devoted to the explanation of this important topic . In the British Quarterly the views of Human progression , as maintained by Comte , Herbert Spencer , and the anonymous author of The Theory of Human Progression , are set -forth and criticized . In the North British
a retrospect is taken of the various attempts at a philosophy of History , and Comte and Herbert Spencer are again discussed . From internal evidence it is pretty clear that the writer of both articles is the same person , and our readers will do well to study both articles together , for they throw light on and complete each other . On some points we are at issue with the Reviewer , and regret that haste or radical distaste for the school to
which Herbert Spencer belongs , should have led him into that occasional misrepresentation which any careful reader of Social Statics will observe . His argument against Individualism , or the notion that Social Science is purely the science of individual liberty , we have long held ; but although we think him right in his polemic against Herbert Spencer , he is very wrong in the supposition that Spencer ignores the existence of Humanity as the highest development . Society is not merely an aggregation of individuals , but the supreme Organization of which individuals are the members ;
in § Hi of the General Considerations ( Social Statics , p . 448 ) there is an elaborate statement of the analogy between Humanity and its individual members and the Man and his individual partsbetween the llody Politic and the Human Bodyto which we refer the Reviewer , although it is not clear to nt » how Spencer would make this square with the principles of his Social Statics . Having premised this much , we will follow the Reviewer , who in the North British says : — I here in , it appears tons , something confusing in the terms in which Mr . Spencer and Mr . Mill state their belief that , the phenomena of society are only the manifestations of t , ] , e human nature of
individuals in u Mt . iile of union . 1 < W , though the individunl human hein-, as niicIi , in conceivable to us , and though I ben ; are certain sciences which are concernrd with the "laws of purel y individual human nature ; yet , in point of fact , the individual human br . intj is utwiti / s tJiouijht of by un us a member of society . The individual man who is the object of our studies " ih always imagined as already existing in social relation . ship with other men ; ho that many of the phenomena which we set down as those of individual human n . tmc , aro in reality dependent for their existence on what , Mr . Spencer calls the accident of ( social combination . In short , intend of rop , < , ini ' socuty « M I > i » i 11- up of individuals , we may reverso thp mode of thought , and represent indi vidual * aa
the decomposed particles of society . In this sensq , of course , it is true that the properties of the mass are the combined result of the properties of the particles , seeing that we have already implied in the particles the properties which they derive from belonging to the mass . But if we conceive the particles per se , if we first take for granted about human beings only as much as it is possible for us to conceive known about the . m as individual objects , then it i s
not true that the farther knowledge of what would result from the -accident of their combination would be a mere work of logical inference . Were our knowledge of individual huma . n nature in this sense as profound and accurate as it could possibly be , we could no more deduce thence the phenomena of associated human nature without the help of empyric observation of society than we could tell beforehand , from our knowledge of oxygen and hydrogen separately , that , when combined , they would form water . "
The vulgarest experience will teach us how differently masses of men act from what the same men as individuals would act—as in committees , meetings , regiments , &c . And if men as masses are different from men as individuals , the laws which regulate social life cannot be learned from the isolated study of individuals . Against those who think otherwise the Reviewer finely says : — " The radical fallacy of these , it appears to us , consists in this , that they proceed on the supposition that society has no life , no purpose , no destiny as such , hut is a mere numerical succession of individual existences . Hence , fixing his regard on the increase
of the happiness of individuals , as the highest conceivable object for which the world can have been created , and having formulized the conditions of this happiness in the principle of equal rights for all , he constructs an ideal of society , whose highest principle is the rule of universal Laissez-faire . The whple problem of the Social state is , according to his [ Mr . Spencer ' s ] view , to secure liber £ y to every individual to do as he pleases , so long as he does not infringe on the liberty of others to do as they please ; and the sole purpose of government is therefore the negative one of repressing crime . Now , onr view is , in a
great degree , the reverse of this . Society , as we believe , is not merely a device for the wellbeing of individuals ; it has , we believe , an organic life , an ulterior destination , of its own ; and it may . sometimes even happen , we think , as in the case of a general war , that what is good and splendid in the social development , may not coincide with what is immediately beneficial for the individuals concerned in effecting it . Instead , therefore , of subordinating the laws of society to the ascertained personal interests of the individual , we would subordinate the laws of individual action to the ascertained conditions of noble social existence . " The same fine argument is thus stated in the British Quarterly : — " The essence of the difference we feel from our authors on this point seems to be , that whereas they view the problem of the equitable constitution of society as the mere problem of securing to each of the associated individuals exactly as much liberty to do right or wrong at his pleasure as is consistent with the equal liberty of all the others to do rig ht or wrong at their pleasure ; we , on the other hand , aro disposed to view the problem of the social life as il problem of high separate account , the adequate solution of which has this fine condition annexed to it ,
that it necessarily imposes restrictions on the individual liberty of wrong-doing , additional to those arising from the circumstance , that there are so many claimants of this liberty all living together . In other words , we do not regard the law of the right constitution of society as identical with tho law of tho greatest possible individual freedom to do rig ht or wrong ; but we regard thin law of tho greatest individiml freedom to do right or wrong , as farther conditioned for the individual by the obligation on society , as such , to do right . Hence , were we to venture on any metaphysical definition of the principle of the rights of men in Kociety , it would be ,
that all men should have equal liberty to do rig ' ' wrong , but that all wen should have equal liberty to do what is in itself right . This is no mere quibble * It , leaves ample scope for still farther extension * » l the world of the principle of social liberty ; f ° ""! r laws , many custom ** , many institutions still cxih ¦> which restrict tho liberty of some classes to d <> tiling undeniably right , an compared with the liberty <> others to do the same things . And , though it > ' journs and complicates almost indefinitely , llI 1 ( 1 reu ' j " »»*« 'i twin v . v / u « i ; ii Lilian ciiiiivjn k . iuui 'iii'ii . « * j » — j h
dein vastly more dubious and diflienlt the problem < the equitable constitution of society , weeing tli" « -. _* leaves tho great question , ' What is right ? ' to be h ' determined , it at tho name time adds nobility » ' » glory to that problem . It provides , and leg itii »< j . J provides , for the eternal continuance in society 0 ^ kind of agency , which it is in tho naturo more t'Hj ) < daily of Mr . Sfljphcer ' H interpretation of the llu : ( 'P | 1 ( , hiieer at , the agency of personal domination , <>* compulsion of better and greater and more vciieK 1 over worso in id weaker and younger men . It dotn within th # body politic , as such , tho high hcubo
Untitled Article
7 S 6 1 R %$ Ht air ft * [ Saturday ,
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), Aug. 9, 1851, page 756, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1895/page/16/
-