Durant - Philosophy and the Social Problem

The purpose of this essay is to show: first, that the social problem hasbeen the basic concern of many of the greater philosophers; second, thatan approach to the social problem through philosophy is the firstcondition of even a moderately successful treatment of this problem; andthird, that an approach to philosophy through the social problem isindispensable to the revitalization of philosophy.

By "philosophy" we shall understand a study of experience as a whole, orof a portion of experience in relation to the whole.

By the "social problem" we shall understand, simply and very broadly,the problem of reducing human misery by modifying social institutions.It is a problem that, ever reshaping itself, eludes sharper definition;for misery is related to desire, and desire is personal and in perpetualflux: each of us sees the problem unsteadily in terms of his ownchanging aspirations. It is an uncomfortably complicated problem, ofcourse; and we must bear in mind that the limit of our intention here isto consider philosophy as an approach to the problem, and the problemitself as an approach to philosophy. We are proposing no solutions.

Let us, as a wholesome measure of orientation, touch some of themountain-peaks in philosophical history, with an eye for the socialinterest that lurks in every metaphysical maze. "Aristotle," saysProfessor Woodbridge, "set treatise-writers the fashion of beginningeach treatise by reviewing previous opinions on their subject, andproving them all wrong." The purpose of the next five chapters willbe rather the opposite: we shall see if some supposedly deadphilosophies do not admit of considerable resuscitation. Instead oftrying to show that Socrates, Plato, Bacon, Spinoza, and Nietzsche werequite mistaken in their views on the social problem, we shall try to seewhat there is in these views that can help us to understand our ownsituation to-day. We shall not make a collection of systems of socialphilosophy; we shall not lose ourselves in the past in a scholarlyeffort to relate each philosophy to its social and politicalenvironment; we shall try to relate these philosophies rather to our ownenvironment, to look at our own problems successively through the eyesof these philosophers. Other interpretations of these men we shall notso much contradict as seek to supplement.

Each of our historical chapters, then, will be not so much a review as apreface and a progression. The aim will be neither history norcriticism, but a kind of construction by proxy. It is a method that hasits defects: it will, for example, sacrifice thoroughness of scholarshipto present applicability, and will necessitate some repetitiousgathering of the threads when we come later to our more personalpurpose. But as part requital for this, we shall save ourselves fromconsidering the past except as it is really present, except as it isalive and nourishingly significant to-day. And from each study we shallperhaps make some advance towards our final endeavor,the mutualelucidation of the social problem and philosophy.

History is a process of rebarbarization. A people made vigorous byarduous physical conditions of life, and driven by the increasingexigencies of survival, leaves its native habitat, moves down upon aless vigorous people, conquers, displaces, or absorbs it. Habits ofresolution and activity developed in a less merciful environment nowrapidly produce an economic surplus; and part of the resources soaccumulated serve as capital in a campaign of imperialist conquest. Thegrowing surplus generates a leisure class, scornful of physical activityand adept in the arts of luxury. Leisure begets speculation; speculationdissolves dogma and corrodes custom, develops sensitivity of perceptionand destroys decision of action. Thought, adventuring in a labyrinth ofanalysis, discovers behind society the individual; divested of itsnormal social function it turns inward and discovers the self. Thesense of common interest, of commonwealth, wanes; there are no citizensnow, there are only individuals.

From afar another people, struggling against the forces of an obdurateenvironment, sees here the cleared forests, the liberating roads, theharvest of plenty, the luxury of leisure. It dreams, aspires, dares,unites, invades. The rest is as before.

Rebarbarization is rejuvenation. The great problem of any civilizationis how to rejuvenate itself without rebarbarization.

The rise of philosophy, then, often heralds the decay of a civilization.Speculation begins with nature and begets naturalism; it passes tomanfirst as a psychological mystery and then as a member ofsocietyand begets individualism. Philosophers do not always desirethese results; but they achieve them. They feel themselves the unwillingenemies of the state: they think of men in terms of personality whilethe state thinks of men in terms of social mechanism. Some philosopherswould gladly hold their peace, but there is that in them which will out;and when philosophers speak, gods and dynasties fall. Most states havehad their roots in heaven, and have paid the penalty for it: thetwilight of the gods is the afternoon of states.

Every civilization comes at last to the point where the individual, madeby speculation conscious of himself as an end per se, demands of thestate, as the price of its continuance, that it shall henceforth enhancerather than exploit his capacities. Philosophers sympathize with thisdemand, the state almost always rejects it: therefore civilizations comeand civilizations go. The history of philosophy is essentially anaccount of the efforts great men have made to avert socialdisintegration by building up natural moral sanctions to take the placeof the supernatural sanctions which they themselves have destroyed. Tofindwithout resorting to celestial machinerysome way of winning fortheir people social coherence and permanence without sacrificingplasticity and individual uniqueness to regimentation,that has beenthe task of philosophers, that is the task of philosophers.

We should be thankful that it is. Who knows but that within our own timemay come at last the forging of an effective natural ethic?anachievement which might be the most momentous event in the history ofour world.

The great ages in the history of European thought have been for the mostpart periods of individualistic effervescence: the age of Socrates, theage of Csar and Augustus, the Renaissance, the Enlightenment;andshall we add the age which is now coming to a close? These ages haveusually been preceded by periods of imperialist expansion: imperialismrequires a tightening of the bonds whereby individual allegiance to thestate is made secure; and this tightening, given a satiety ofimperialism, involves an individualistic reaction. And again, thedissolution of the political or economic frontier by conquest orcommerce breaks down cultural barriers between peoples, develops a senseof the relativity of customs, and issues in the opposition of individual"reason" to social tradition.