CHAPTER XV

EDUCATION AND SOCIAL PROGRESS

As has just been said, the ultimate reliance in all social reform or

social reconstruction must be upon the education of the individual.

Social organization can never be more complex or of a higher type than

the individual character and intelligence of the members of the group

warrants. At any given stage of society, therefore, the intelligence and

moral character of its individual members limits social organization.

Only by raising the intelligence and character of the individual members

of society can a higher type of social life permanently result.

Another fact to which the student needs his attention called is that all

progress in human society, it follows, from what has just been said,

depends upon the relation between one generation and its successor. Only

as new life comes into society is there opportunity to improve the

character of that life. If at any given time intelligence and character

limit the possibilities of social organization, then it is equally

manifest that only in the new individuals of society can that

intelligence and character be greatly improved.

There are, of course, two possible ways of bringing about such

improvement:--first, through the selection of the hereditary elements in

society, eliminating the unfit and preserving the more fit; but, as we

have repeatedly pointed out, such a scheme of artificial selection is

far in the future, and in any case its inauguration would have to depend

upon the _second_ method of improving individual character, which

is through education and training. As we have insisted, not only may the

natural instincts and tendencies of individuals be greatly modified by

training but through education the habits and hence the character of

individuals can be controlled. Therefore the main reliance of society in

all forward movements must be upon education, that is, upon artificial

means of controlling the formation of character and habit in

individuals.

The finality of education in social betterment can be, perhaps, further

illustrated by reconsidering for a moment some of the social problems

which we have just studied. Take for example the problem of crime. There

are only three possible means, as we have already seen, of eliminating

crime from human society:--first, through changes in individual human

nature, brought about by biological selection, that is, through a system

of selective breeding, eliminating all who show any criminal tendencies.

This method would, perhaps, eliminate certain types of criminals as we

have already seen, namely, those in whom the hereditary tendency to

crime is dominant. A second means of attacking the problem of crime

would be by improving social and economic conditions by means of the

interference of the organized authority of society in the form of the

state. Legislation and administration directed to social ends might

accomplish much in reducing the temptations and opportunities for crime

in any group. The correction of evils in social and industrial

organization would, no doubt, again greatly lessen crime but it is

entirely conceivable, from all that we know of human nature and human

society, that crime might still persist under a just social and

industrial organization. Crime could be completely eliminated only

through a third means, namely, the careful training of each new

individual in society as he came on the stage of life, so that he would

be moral and law-abiding, respecting the rights of others and the

institutions of society. Moreover, neither selective breeding nor

governmental interference in social conditions could accomplish very

much in eliminating crime unless these were backed by a wise system of

social education.

Now what is true of crime is equally true of all social problems. They

may be approached from either of three sides:--first, from the

biological side, or the side of physical heredity; second, from the side

of social organization, or the improvement of the social environment;

third, from the side of individual character, or the psychical

adjustment of the individual to society. As Professor Ward and many

other sociologists have emphasized, it is this latter side which is the

most available point of attack on all social problems; for when we have

secured a right attitude of the individual toward society all social

problems will be more than half solved. Thus, as we said at the

beginning of this book, education has a bearing upon every social

problem, and every social problem also has a bearing upon education.

Just how important this reciprocal relationship between education and

social life is, we can appreciate only when we have considered somewhat

more fully the nature of social progress.

The Nature of Social Progress.--Social progress has been defined in many

ways by the social thinkers of the past. Without entering into any

formal definition of social progress, we believe that it will be evident

to the reader of this book that social progress consists, for one thing,

in the more complete adaptation of society to the conditions of life. We

regard those changes as progressive whether they be moral, intellectual,

or material, which bring about a better adaptation of individuals to one

another in society, and of social groups to the requirements of their

existence. Social progress means, in other words, the adaptation of

society to a wider and more universal environment. The ideal of human

progress is apparently adaptation to a perfectly universal environment,

such an adaptation as shall harmonize all factors whether internal or

external, present or remote, in the life of humanity. Social progress

means, therefore, greater harmony among the members of a group. It means

also greater efficiency of those members in performing their work.

Finally, it means greater ability on the part of the group to survive.

Social progress includes, therefore, the ideals of social harmony,

social efficiency, and social survival. Things which do not ultimately

conduce to these ends can scarcely be called progressive.

Now it is evident that adaptation on the part of individuals and groups

to the requirements of life may be in part accomplished by biological

selection, that is, by eliminating the least adapted. But selection is,

after all, a very clumsy and imperfect instrument for securing the

highest type of adaptation. Again, it is evident that a certain degree

of adaptation can be secured through the constraint of government and

law; but only a relatively low type of adaptation can be secured in such

an external way. It is finally evident, therefore, that the highest

type of adaptation in either individual or social life can be secured

only by training the intelligence and moral character of individuals so

that they will be sufficient to meet the requirements of existence.

Another feature of social progress which we have not yet mentioned in

this chapter, though we have noted it repeatedly in earlier chapters, is

the increased complexity of social organization. This increased

complexity is in part due to the mere increase in numbers. It is also

due to the various processes themselves by which wider and more

universal adaptation is brought about in society. Thus, while every

useful mechanical invention aids man to conquer nature, it at the same

time increases the complexity of social life. Now in a more complex

society there is more opportunity for conflicts of habit between

individuals, more opportunity for social maladjustment, and therefore

more opportunity for the failure of some part or all of the group in

achieving a social life characterized by harmony, efficiency, and

capacity for survival. Hence, the adaptation of individuals in the

large and complex groups of modern civilized societies becomes a greater

and greater problem. The regulative institutions of society, such as

government, law, religion, and education, have to grapple with this

problem of adjusting individuals to the requirements of an increasingly

complex social life. No doubt religion, government, and law have a great

function to perform in increasing social regulation, but they can only

perform it effectively after they enlist education on their side.

The Social Function of Education.--We are now prepared to understand the

meaning of educational systems in civilized society and to see what the

true function of education is. Education exists to adapt individuals to

their social life. It is for the purpose of fitting the individual to

take his place in the social group and to add something to the life of

the group. Educational systems exist not to train the individual to

develop his powers and capacity simply as an individual unit, but rather

to fit him effectively to carry on the social life before he actively

participates in it. In other words, the social function of education is

to guide and control the formation of habit and character on the part of

the individual, as well as to develop his capacity and powers, so that

he shall become an efficient member of society. This work is not, at

least in complex civilizations like our own, one which we carry on

simply in order to achieve social perfection, but it is rather something

which is necessary for the survival of large and complex groups.

Otherwise, as we have pointed out, the conflicts in the acquirement of

habit and character on the part of individuals would be so great that

there would be no possibility of their working together harmoniously in

a common social life. Just so far as the system of education is

defective, is insufficient to meet social needs, in so far may we expect

the production of individuals who are socially maladjusted, as shown in

pauperism, defectiveness, and crime.

Education is, then, the great means of controlling habit and character

in complex social groups, and as such it is the chief means to which

society must look for all substantial social progress. It is the

instrument by which human nature may be apparently indefinitely

modified, and hence, also, the instrument by which society may be

perfected. The task of social regeneration is essentially a task of

education.

Education as a Factor in Past Social Evolution.--Does past social

history justify these large claims for education as a factor in social

development? It must be replied that the history of human society

undoubtedly substantiates this position, but even if it did not, we

should still have good ground for claiming that education can be such an

all-powerful factor in the social future. The sociological study of past

civilizations, however, shows quite conclusively that all of them have

depended in one way or another upon educational processes, not only for

continuity, but largely, also, for their development. As we have already

seen, the life history of a culture or a civilization is frequently the

life history of a religion. But religious beliefs, together with the

moral and social beliefs, which become attached to them, were

effectively transmitted only through the instruction of the young. The

religious element did scarcely more than afford a powerful sanction for

the moral and social beliefs upon which the social organization of the

past rested; hence, when we ascribe great importance to the religious

factor in social evolution, we also ascribe, at the same time, great

importance to education, because it was essentially the educational

process, together with religious sanction, which made possible most of

the civilizations and social progress of the past.

Indeed, we have no record of any people of any very considerable culture

that did not employ educational processes to the largest degree to

preserve and transmit that culture from generation to generation.

Culture has been passed down in human history, therefore, essentially by

educational processes. These educational processes have controlled the

formation of habits and character, of ways of thinking and ways of

acting, in successive generations of individuals. The educational

processes have had much more to do, therefore, with the civilizations

and social organization of the past than industrial conditions.

Industrial conditions have been rather relatively external factors in

the social environment to which society has had to adapt itself more or

less. In the same way, political authority has rested on, and been

derived from, the social traditions rather than the reverse. It is

therefore not too much for the sociologist to say, agreeing with Thomas

Davidson, that education is the last and highest method of social

evolution. The lowest method of evolution was by selection, and

_that_, as we have already emphasized, cannot be neglected. The

next method of social evolution apparently to develop was the method of

adaptation by organized authority, and, as we have already seen,

organized authority in society, or social regulation by means of

authority, must indefinitely persist and perhaps increase, rather than

diminish; but the latest and highest method of social evolution is not

through biological selection nor through the exercise of despotic

authority, but through the education of the individual, so that he shall

become adjusted to the social life in habits and character before he

participates in it. Human society may be modified, we now see, best

through modifying the nature of the individual, and the most direct

method to do this is through education.

The Socialized Education of the Future.--If what has been said is

substantially correct, then education should become conscious of its

social mission and purpose. The educator should conserve education as

the chief means of social progress, and education should be directed to

producing efficient members of society. The education of the future must

aim, in other words, not at producing lawyers, physicians, engineers,

but at producing citizens. Education for citizenship means that there

must be radical reconstruction in the educational processes of the

present. The education of the nineteenth century aimed at developing

largely power and capacity in the individual as such. Its implicit, and

oftentimes its avowed, aim was individual success. The popularity of

higher education in the nineteenth century especially rested upon the

cult of individual success. It became, therefore, largely

commercialized, and emphasized chiefly the professions and occupations

which best assured the individual a successful career among a commercial

and industrial people.

It is needless to say that the individualistic, commercialized education

of the latter years of the nineteenth century very often failed to

produce the good citizen. On the contrary, with its ideal of individual

power and success, it frequently produced the cultured freebooter, which

our modern industry has so often afforded examples of. Education,

instead of being a socializing agency and the chief instrument of social

regeneration, became an individualizing agency dissolving the social

order itself.

Very slowly our educators are becoming conscious of the fact that this

type of education is a social menace, and that our educational system

needs reformation from bottom to top in order to become again equal to

the social task imposed upon it by the more complex social conditions of

the twentieth century. Hence the demand for a socialized education,

which is proceeding, not only from sociologists and social workers, but

from the progressive leaders of education itself. What this socialized

education of the future shall be is not the province of this book to

discuss, but a few of its essential characteristics may be noted. As

has already been said, such education will aim, first of all, at

producing the citizen before it aims at producing the lawyer, the

engineer, the physician, or any other professional or occupational type.

No doubt, this means, for one thing, that all individuals shall be

taught to be good fathers and mothers, good neighbors and members of

communities, even more than they are taught the accomplishments of life.

No doubt, also, the socialized education of the future will emphasize

the adjustment of the individual to the industrial order of society,

because it is necessary that individuals shall be producers if they are

to be efficient citizens. The necessity and value of industrial

training in our system of education has already been emphasized in

discussing other social problems. Such training has its place and that

place, as we have already seen, is a very important and fundamental one;

but it must not be forgotten that the relations of men to one another

are more important than the relations of men to nature. In industrial

training, the element which is apt to be emphasized is the relations of

the individual to the physical facts and forces of nature; but this is

only a beginning of the training for citizenship, because good

citizenship consists essentially in harmonious and efficient functioning

in the social group. Therefore, the study of the relationships of men to

one another must be the final and crowning element in a system of social

education. Such studies as history, government, economics, ethics, and

sociology must occupy a larger and larger place in the education of the

future if we are to secure a humanity adjusted to the requirements of

its existence. Historical and sociological instruction should lead up,

moreover, to direct ethical instruction. If the industrial element in

the social life is important, the moral element is even more so, since

it is, as we have already said, the ideal aspect of the social. In some

way or another, our public schools, from the kindergarten up, must make

a place for social and ethical instruction of a direct and explicit

character.

In the higher education, the social sciences must be especially

emphasized, because it is those who receive higher education who become

the leaders of society, and it is important, no matter what occupation

or profession they may serve society in, that they understand the

bearings of their work upon social welfare. They must know their duties

as citizens and understand how society may best be served. In other

words, our higher education should put to the front the ideal, not of

individual power and success, but of social service; and this means

that, in addition to the technical or professional education which the

more highly educated are giving, there must be a sufficient knowledge of

social conditions and of the laws and principles of social progress

given them to enable them to serve society rightly. Intelligent social

service cannot exist without social knowledge.

All this implies that the older idea that education can be given

regardless of content is, from the social point of view, a great

mistake. Social knowledge is necessary, as we have just said, for

efficient social service, and a socialized education can have no other

end than social service. Therefore, sociological knowledge in the

broadest sense should be required in the education of every citizen, and

particularly those who are to become social leaders. Professor Ward has

ably argued that if sufficient information of the facts, conditions, and

laws of human society could be given to all, that alone would bring

about in the highest degree social progress. Whether we agree or not

that the mere giving of information will of itself lead to progressive

or dynamic action in society, it must be admitted that right social

information is indispensable for right social action. As Professor

Cooley has said, "We live in a system, and to achieve right ends, or any

rational ends whatever, we must learn to understand that system."

Hence, the commanding place which sociology and the social sciences

should occupy in the education of all classes, and especially in the

training of the teacher himself.

It is not unreasonable to believe that the development of the social

sciences will show us the way to remove many, if not all, social evils;

and it is also not unreasonable to believe that the knowledge which

these sciences will furnish will stimulate in the vast mass of

individuals an impetus to remove these evils. Moreover, training in the

social sciences will check many of the most menacing tendencies of our

present civilization. For one thing, training in the social sciences

will lessen the practical materialism of modern civilization, for it

will throw the emphasis on the relations of men to one another rather

than on the relations of man to nature. The social sciences, aiming at

the control of the social conditions and of social progress, necessarily

emphasize the higher life of man, and they therefore set before the

student as the goal, not material achievement or individual success, but

the service of man. Again, training in the social sciences will check

the exaggerated individualism, which, as we have already seen, is one of

the most menacing tendencies of our time; for the social sciences show

the solidarity of the society and the interdependence of its parts. They

show that no individual lives to himself, and that his acts evidently

affect the whole of society. Finally, training in the social sciences

will insure the development of true moral freedom in our social life,

for these sciences involve a searching but impersonal criticism of

social institutions and public policies. Now the very breath of life of

a free society is intelligent public criticism of its institutions and

policies. Without this, there can be no change, no progress. But

intelligent criticism implies scientific criticism, that is, criticism

based upon adequate scientific knowledge and without personal bias. This

means the scientific study of institutions and social organization. If

the American people are to perfect their institutions, they must

maintain and develop their moral freedom; and to maintain true moral

freedom, they must encourage the scientific study of social conditions

and institutions. To secure an unbiased attitude toward social and

political problems, to train every citizen for social service, to

reconstruct social organization along scientific lines, it is necessary,

therefore, to give the social sciences an honored place in the education

of all classes and professions.

SELECT REFERENCES

_For brief reading_:

WARD, _Applied Sociology_, Chaps. VIII-XII.

WARD, _Dynamic Sociology_, Vol. II, Chap. XIV.

HORNE, _The Philosophy of Education_, Chaps. IV and V.

DEWEY, _The School and Society_.

_For more extended reading_:

DAVIDSON, _History of Education_.

GRAVES, _History of Education_.

MONROE, _History of Education_.

Sociology and Modern Social Problems · 第 15 / 15 章