SUPPLEMENTARY READINGS. BAGEHOT, W.-Physics and Politics. COOLEY, C. H.-Social Organization. GIDDINGS, F. H.-The Principles of Sociology. KROPOTKIN, P.-Mutual Aid. SUMNER, W. G.-Folkways. NOTE. John Fiske thought that the family was the chief factor in social evolution which brought about the development of man's higher emotional, moral and intellectual nature. The human nervous system is such a complex thing that its development is extended over a considerable period. During the period of helplessness, parental instincts led one or both parents to care for the young. Hence the prolongation of infancy served to keep the parents together for longer and longer periods in successive epochs. In this way the family became the source of associated life. Giddings considers that Fiske's theory reverses the probable order of cause and effect. The complex brain and nervous system which brought about the prolongation of infancy could only have developed as a consequence of the stimulating relationships of social life. Hence there must have been association before the family group appeared. Whatever its form, this primitive social life was sufficiently stimulating to cause the adjustment in nervous structure which resulted in the prolongation of infancy, and this, in turn, resulted in the family. Thus it is seen that the family was not the single original germ from which society grew. On this point others have written. Petrucci says, "The family, therefore, is not essential to the formation of societies. The clan may sometimes be an extension of the family, but in certain animal species, as in man himself, it is not always the direct line of parentage which is at the basis of the group. Sometimes, furthermore, the group can be established only when the family disappears." In discussing the origin of human society, Kropotkin says that anthropology "has established beyond any doubt that mankind did not begin its life in the shape of small isolated families. Far from being a primitive form of organization, the family is a very late product of human evolution. . . Societies, bands, or tribes-not families were the primitive form of organization of mankind and its earliest ancestors. None of the higher mammals, save a few carnivores and a few undoubtedly decaying species of apes (orang-outans and gorillas), live in small families, isolatedly struggling in the woods. All others live in societies." For a more complete discussion, see Parmelee, The Science of Human Behavior, pp. 399-421. V THE INFLUENCES OF PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT LIFE in society becomes a life of increasing complexity and richness of experience. The intricate adjustments and adaptations demanded of social individuals tend to make them more refined in their responses to external stimuli, and develop a highly complicated nervous organization accompanied by an increasing mellowness of culture. But the individual man or animal living under the conditions of group life is none the less subjected to influences from the surrounding conditions of its physical environment. Climate, soil, food, and the general topography of the group's habitat exercise a powerful sway over the life of both group and individual. The conditions of surrounding nature act as compelling and restraining forces to which adaptations must be made. The inheritance of modifications caused during the life of the organism by its effort to adapt itself to the forces of environment, has been discussed in chapter II. In the present chapter we shall consider the effect of geographic environment upon the mode of life and the cultural development of social groups. "Man can no more be scientifically studied apart from the ground which he tills, or the lands over which he travels, or the seas over which he trades, than the polar bear or the desert cactus can be understood apart from its habitat. Man's relations to this environment are infinitely more numerous and complex than those of the most highly organized plant or animal. So complex are they that they constitute a legitimate and necessary object of special study. . . . Man has been so noisy about the way he has 'conquered Nature,' and Nature has been so silent in her persistent influence over man, that the geographic factor in the equation of human development has been overlooked. . . . Now the geographic element in the long history of human development has been operating strongly and operating persistently. Herein lies its importance. It is a stable force. It never sleeps. This natural environment, this physical basis of history, is, for all intents and purposes immutable in comparison with the other factor in the problem-shifting, plastic, progressive, retrogressive man." 1 Miss Semple makes us see that in every problem of history there are two main factors, commonly called heredity and environment. Professor Cooley makes us look upon mind and matter, soil, climate, flora, fauna, thought, language, and institutions as aspects of a single rounded whole, one of total growth. He presents the organic view of history. He expressly denies that any factor is more ultimate than others. If we concentrate our attention upon one of these factors, we should never go so far as to overlook the subordination of each to the whole. "History is not like a tangled skein which you may straighten out by getting hold of the right end and following it with sufficient persistence . . . there is no logical primacy, no independent variable, no place where the thread begins. Both Miss Semple and Professor 2. 992 1 Semple, E. C.-The Influences of Geographic Environment, 1911, ch. i, p. 2 Cooley, C. H.-Pub. Amer. Economic Association, 3rd Ser., vol. v, ff. 426, and Cooley, op. cit. ch. xxii. Cooley are right in their interpretations. The important thing to remember is that we are dealing with society, a social organization which has had an organic growth dependent upon certain conditions. It is our primary object to classify and enumerate these conditions, not to assign fixed and dogmatic causal relations among them. Physical environment may affect the human individual as an influence causing modification in structure or function, it may accelerate or retard physical and mental growth by the presence or absence of proper nutriment, and it may act as a selective agency determining survival or extermination. Although anthropologists regard the form of the body as the most stable characteristic of any given race or type, indications have been found which show that under more favorable environment the physical development of a race may improve. The investigations of Gould and Baxter during the War of the Rebellion have shown that the representatives of European nationalities born in America have statures higher than the representatives of the same nationalities born in Europe. It was assumed that better nutrition and improved hygienic and economic conditions in general might increase the stature of a people. These conclusions were confirmed by Bowditch's measurements of the school children of Boston and by other investigations of similar nature.1 Corroborative evidence has also been obtained from the study of various social classes. Bowditch found that there was an increase of stature, beginning with the children of unskilled laborers, and increasing among 3 Gould, B. A.-Investigations in the Military and Anthropological Statistics of American Soldiers, New York, 1869; and Baxter, J. H.— Statistics, Medical and Anthropological, Wash., 1875. 4 Bowditch, H. P.-The Growth of Children, 8th Annual Report State Bd. of Health of Mass., Boston, 1877; see also Boas, op. cit., ch. ii. those of skilled laborers, members of the mercantile class and of the professional class. But these changes of stature are not to be interpreted as changes in type. It is better to regard them as due to the elimination of retarding influences which prevent many individuals from attaining their normal growth.5 The retarding and accelerating influences of physical environment often bring about very considerable changes in anthropometric traits during the period of growth. Professor Boas says, "Setting aside the prenatal development, we find that at the time of birth some parts of the body are so fully developed that they are not far removed from their final size, while others are quite undeveloped. Thus the skull is, comparatively speaking, large at the time of birth, grows rapidly for a short time, but very soon approaches its full size, and then continues to grow very slowly. The limbs, on the other hand, grow rapidly for many years. Other organs do not begin their rapid development until much later in life. Thus it happens that retarding or accelerating influences acting upon the body at different periods of growth may have quite different results. After the head has nearly completed its growth, retarding influences may still influence the length of the limbs. The face, which grows rapidly for a longer period than the cranium, can be influenced later than the latter. In short, the influence of environment may be the more marked, the less developed the organ that is subject to it." An important consequence of this for the sociologist is that the retardation seems to be lasting. "In other words, a retardation in development is never completely made good by long-continued development."7 It has been demonstrated by the in 5 Boas, ibid. 6 Ibid., pp. 47-48. 7 Ibid. |