💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › freedom-press-london-scientific-muddles.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 10:20:51. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Title: Scientific Muddles Author: Freedom Press, Anonymous Date: February, 1887 Language: en Topics: Freedom Press, Freedom: A Journal of Anarchist Socialism Source: Freedom: A Journal of Anarchist Socialism, Vol. 1, No. 5, online source http://www.revoltlib.com/?id=3123, retrieved on May 2, 2020. Notes: Freedom Press, London
It is quite possible in our enlightened times to be scientific over much
and Anarchists will do well to beware of staking the validity and
success of their doctrines of life and society upon the truth of
mechanical and fatalistic theories of evolution which attempt to bridge
over the gulf that at least appears to gape between physical science and
social theory, between the facts of the inanimate and animal world and
the facts of human existence. Our danger is that we shall level down,
instead of up.
The reflections here presented on this subject have been suggested by a
perusal of an article in the Contemporary Review for September last, by
Leon Metchnikoff, entitled "Evolution and Revolution."
Metchnikoff is a good, well -meaning Anarchist, but he is a little too
much in love with the elaborate evolutionary science armor. He tries to
put it on, rejecting several pieces which are obvious misfits ; and in
the end just succeeds in hobbling along, encumbered, embarrassed, and
awkwardly brandishing the foreign weapons. It is on the whole a sad
grotesque spectacle, and meaningless, except as a warning. First to be
tried on is the system of Herbert Spencer. " Sociology is a physical
science like others: its aim cannot be any other than the reduction of
the specific laws of social life to the universal laws of motion"! This
is bridging the abyss, with a vengeance. And if it could really be, it
would be it full vindication of over-ruling by brute force, and would
ensure the immortal reign of the policeman, the prison, and all the
tools of masterhood. Put it is not likely to be accepted as truth, till
Love is reduced to sound digestion, Hate to liver-complaint, and
Sympathy is found to be the function of some organ in good working
order. 'then there are scientific muddles and puzzles about what is an
individual ? where does the individual end and society begin ? for
instance, is a man an individual or a society? Now this may be an
interesting physiological curiosity, but upon things human and social it
can have no bearing. For the politician or Socialist it is mere
trifling. That a man is one and individual, because he feels and knows
himself to be one and counts himself one, is both sound common-sense and
philosophy, and enough for the theory of practice. We have not time to
reckon how many angels can stand on the point of a needle. " Men , "
says our science-beglamored friend, "like other mammalia, are in fact
associations of such colonies of cells." But it is men as men, and not
as mammalia, that interest us as Socialists. "Our inveterate tendency to
consider ourselves as an end and center of the creation makes us prone
to prejudge that our individuality is the only genuine one." Quite true,
and we are not merely prone, but compelled so to judge. My own oneness
and individuality is the only one immediately known, all others are
reflections or projections of that one unity. I make things in my own
likeness. So, and only so, do I (and every other I) get a world of
individual things and persons. Science is perforce anthropomorphic; more
subtly perhaps, but just as really and inevitably as the first makers of
myth and fetish. But our scientific friend would fain wriggle out of
anthropomorphism and anthropocentricism. Yet, if we could cease to
regard ourselves "as an end and center of the creation," creation would
soon make an end of us. But Metchnikoff is so enamored of science that
has not reflected upon, criticized, and recognized its own grounds and
methods, that with him anthropomorphic is synonymous with
"anti-scientific."
The next muddle encountered in the search after "science" is the piece
of rhetoric so familiar now, that "a society is an organism." It is only
in Germany that this is taken for more than an analogy on three legs or
very lame figure of speech. But there it has inspired a savant (Jaeger)
to give a zoological account of human societies as a last chapter of a
biological handbook! Schaeffle takes the same bestial line, and finds a
Bismarckian state-socialism at the top of the zoological tree. But what
else can come of seriously regarding a human community as a kind of
banyan-tree or leviathan, and talking solemnly of its "organs, tissues,
cells, and inter-cellular substance"!
Is society under the law of gravitation only, or under that and the
Malthus-Darwinian law of struggle and starvation only; or is it, as
conscious and endowed with reason and will and capable of setting before
itself ideal ends, a law unto itself ? According to the answer given, it
is either mountain, mouse, or man-organic or super-organic unity.
Metchnikoff finds this higher self-determined law of reasonable goodwill
to be consent, cooperation, voluntary and conjoint aiming at an end not
personal to any one or more only and exclusively, but personal to all
equally. But in doing so he unconsciously disencumbers himself of all
pseudo-scientific sociology, and affirms a principle and practice above
nature, in the restricted scientific and evolutionary sense-a spirit and
power that will use nature and not be swung about and used up by it. He
is now entitled to assert that "the end can be but one:
viz., Anarchy-i.e., cooperation of autonomous individuals, not by
mechanical, physiological, or political constraint, but plainly and
completely by their own conscious and free will." "The law of the future
society is anarchy." Yet when he adds, "It surely shall be attained by
nature alone,"- be must mean Nature in a ampler sense than the physical
and zoological-not nature according to Newton, Malthus, and Darwin only,
but nature according to common-sense, philosophy, and humanity. This
wider Nature includes Will, Reason, Sympathy, as its central facts and
factors, and its evolutionary movement includes "revolution," which is
the affirmation of the future by the denial of the past in so far as the
past is a dead thing. Revolution is Recreation.
The positions implied in these reflections are-
1. We have, and are entitled and even constrained to have, a profound
conviction of the Unity of Things. There is a universe.
2. But this conviction is meantime rather of the nature of Faith than
Knowledge or Science.
3. Insistence upon crude and premature attempts to expound this Faith in
continuous detail, as if it were already matter of Science, is only
distracting and embarrassing in practical life like that of the
Socialist and Anarchist.
4. Permissible speculation or imaginative construction, that seeks to
bridge or fill up the gaps in our knowledge, in accordance with our
faith, must be by way of interpreting the lower in terms Of the higher
developments of the universal life, rather than conversely, as the
physical and zoological evolutionists do. Level up.
5. The highest we know is self-consciousness. Therefore in terms of
self-consciousness we must explain, if we will speculate and would not
explain away.
6. Freedom, Duty, Sympathy are facts of self-consciousness only, and
elements of the idea of human society, ultimate, given, and underivable.