第43章

Heseemstoassumethatinstitutionscan’create’theinstinctsbywhichtheyareworked：ortoforgetthattheyprimarilytransmitinsteadoforiginatingpower，thoughindirectlytheyfosterorhinderthedevelopmentofcertaintendencies。Millwouldguardagainsttheabuseofpoliticalpowerbydividingitamongtheseparateindividuals。Hethenperceivesthatheisonlyredistributingthistremendouspowerinsteadofdiminishingitsintensity。Byisolatingthe’individual’hehascondemnedhimtonarrowviewsandpettyideals，buthasnotpreventedhimfromimpressingthemuponthemassofhomogeneousunits。Hence，heisalarmedbytheinevitable’tyrannyofthemajority。’HehasputatremendouspowerintothehandsofDemos，andcanonlysuggestthatitshouldnotbeexercised。

Itis，ifIamright，theacceptanceofthisantithesis，putabsolutely，the’individual，’assomethingnaturalononeside，andlaw，ontheotherside，asabondimposeduponthesociety，whichateverystephampersMill’sstatementofanyvitaltruths。

Hecannotuponthesetermsdrawasatisfactorydistinctionbetweentheindividualandthesociety。Whenmanistakenforaready-madeproduct，whilehissocialrelationcanbe’made’

off-handbythesovereign，itisimpossibletogiveasatisfactoryaccountoftheslowprocessesofevolutioninwhichmakingandgrowingareinextricablyunited，andtheindividualandthesocietyareslowlymodifiedbythegrowthofinstinctsandcustomsunderconstantactionandreaction。Thedifficultyofcourseisnotsolvedbyrecognisingitsexistence。Noonehasyetlaiddownasatisfactorycriterionoftheproperlimitsofindividualresponsibility。Theproblemistoovastandcomplextoadmitofanyoff-handsolution；andMill’serrorlieschieflyinunder-estimatingthedifficulty。

ThecontrasttoComteissignificant。Theinventorof’sociology’hadseeninthe’individualism’oftherevolutionaryschoolatransitoryandnegativestageofthought，whichwastoleadtoareconstructionofintellectualandsocialauthority。

MillcouldseeinComte’sfinalUtopianothingbuttherestorationofaspiritualdespotisminaformmorecrushingandall-embracingthanthatofthemedievalchurch。Theywenttogetheruptoacertainpoint。Comteheldthat’contradiction’

and’antagonism’werenotultimateends，thoughtheymaybeinseparableincidentsofprogress。Intheintellectualsphereweshouldhopefortheemergenceofarationalinsteadofanarbitraryauthority，andasettlementoffirstprinciples，notapermanentconflictofopinion。Thehopeofachievingsomepermanentconciliationisthejustificationofscepticisminspeculationandrevolutionsinpolitics。Comtesupposedthatsucharesultmightbeachievedinsociology。Ifthatsciencewereconstituted，itsprofessorsmighthavesuchanauthorityasnowpossessedbyastronomersandteachersofphysicalsciences。

Societymightthenbereconstructedonsoundprincipleswhichwouldsecuretheresponsibilityofrulerstosubjects，andtheconfidenceofthesubjectsinrulers。Millinhisearlyenthusiasmhadadmittedthenecessityofa’spiritualpower’tobefoundedonfreediscussion。(61*)Hehad，withComte，condemnedthemerelycriticalattitudeoftherevolutionaryschool。WhenhesawComtedevisinganelaboratehierarchytogovernspeculation，andevendepreciatingthereasonincomparisonwiththe’heart，’

herevolted。Comtewasagreatthinker，greater，even，hethought，thanDescartesorLeibniz，(62*)buthadplungedintoabsurditiessuggestiveofbraindisease。Theabsurditieswere，indeed，flagrant，yetMillstillsympathiseswithmuchofComte’sdoctrine；withthepositivistreligion；andthegeneralsocialconceptions。Evena’spiritualauthority’is，hethinks，desirable。Butitmustbedevelopedthroughfreediscussionandthegradualapproximationofindependentthinkers，notbyprematureorganisationandminutesystematisation。(63*)Theregenerationofsocietyrequiresamoralandintellectualtransfo