Lester Frank Ward and the concept of social progress Item Type text; Thesis-Reproduction (electronic) Authors Hebard, Paul Jones, 1908- Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 23/09/2021 21:56:39 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/553423 L E S T E R FRANK WARD and THE CONCEPT OF SOCIAL PROGRESS by Paul Jones Hebard A Thesis submitted to the faculty of the Department of Economics, Sociology and Business administration in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of arts in the Graduate College University of Arizona 1939 dxy). 2- TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I. INTRODUCTION .................... 1 II, BIOGRAPHY OF LESTER FRANK WARD • . 5 III. SOCIAL ACHIEVEMENT THROUGH SOCIETAL DEVELOPMENT......................... 13 A. The Development of Man B. The social Forces C. The Dynamic Principles IV. SOCIALIZATION OF ACHIEVEMENT .... 29 a . Social Regulation B. Social Invention C. Social Appropriation Through Education D. Attractive Legislation B. Sociooracy F. Eugenics, Euthenics, Eudemics V. CRITICISM........................... 70 VI. CONCLUSION......................... 85 BIBLIOGRAPHY...................... 8? 1 2 2 6 5 3 CHAPTER I IMTROBOOTIOH The notion of progress has been the souree of mueh dis­ cussion since the time of Aristotle, but, only during the last three hundred years, has progress been considered an 1 achievement possible to man. In this sense it is a concept which has developed primarily in the vrostern world. The eastern world, with two exceptions, has failed to develop a theory of progress of any kind. These eastern cultures recognised changes but they considered such changes only the parts of a great cycle. Upon completion this cycle would begin once more and the process would proceed as it had many times before. The two exo^>ti<ms to this general trend in the idea of progress were China and Egypt,* The former in its reverence for preceding generations and the latter in its concern for the future evince hazily a grasp of the progressive nature of mankind.^ 123 1 Teggart, F. J.. Theory of History. Ch. VTTT — 2Case, C. M., Social Process and Human Progress, Oh. II 3Ibia., p. 19 Ibid., .p, 25 " • *’.» '■ : - —• -. -..• Spongier, Oswald, Decline of the West, Ch. IV 2 It remained, however, for Pascal to formulate the idea of the progressive nature of man. Progress was be­ lieved by Pascal to be analogous to the biological development of man, as if society, like the Individual, ... were bo m , matured, and advanced to old age*7 When Turgot, in the eighteenth century propounded his social philosophy, he abandoned the analogous concept and propoe- e ed progress as intellectual accomplishment. Condoroet, a contemporary of Turgot, in his doctrine that man could reach perfectibility, also refused to use the analagoue concept which had so frequently recurred in the philosophical discussion of progress, but Comte, who followed Condorcet in time as well as in theory, return­ ed to the earlier notion once more.^ He did not, how­ ever, use analogy in the extreme way in which Herbert Spencer did. The latter "....so expanded the analogy that it....became identified with the biological view of the universe so that the whole scheme of things la regarded as a single organism, advancing methodically through stages of its growth in 1n obedience to inevitable laws of self expression. W"LU Progress, as Spencer conceived it* whether in the .. 6;- ': ' ■ - ■ • : : -. — Taggart, F. J., Op. Clt., p. 81 '. 7ibid.. p. 81 - ' ' v; - , ' .... ...- ... Ellwoodj C. A., History of Social Philosophy, p. 172 o ■ ; . • - ■ ' . ^ . , Ibid., p. 173 10 Syaonds, J. A. Essays, quoted in Teggart, F. J., Op. Clt.. p. 81 s lowest forms of life or in a highly complex society was ' 11 cooposeti ©f increasing heterogeneity alone# Hence society, as it develops from the simple to the complex, is progressing inevitably. In this idea Spencer undoubted­ ly confused . the Darwinian theory of evolution with social progress since it does not follow that extreme heterogene­ ity or diverse complexity adds to the sum of human progress, v . % ; ; v : "For this reason, Spencer * s....identifications of these two terns (heterogeneity and progress) are fallacious# Spencer has come to represent the social thought of his time more completely than any other. He has, in his ideas on natural liberty and laissez fairs, typified the reactionary complacency of the Victorian era. ...Spencer was a child of his age. He rarely rose above the influence of his social environ­ ment.*15 A concept of progress such as his could not but cast a pall of gloom upon the society of his day, especially among those members of society who comprised the laboring class. At the top of the social scale, the smug and self- . •• - • - ' '■ satisfied Victorians enjoyed an assured position which the propagandizing of individualism seemed to have guaranteed _______ . — - —r— —— Spencer, Herbert, First Principles, p. 396 x*Sorokln, P. Contemporary Sooiologioal Theories, . rev. ed., p. 218 : ““ ■ 13 Sllwood, C. A , . Qp.Clt., p. 464 4 them for an indefinite period to eoiae. Upon this scene Lester F . Ward appeared to give the world a theory of progress which had as its end the im­ provement of society.^ The means he would use were the members of society. Joined together in a vast conscious and deliberate effort to win for mankind the goal of all striving, happiness,18 He agreed with Spenser that the human type had developed from a lower form; But he denied that development alone constituted social progress,^ In­ creasing heterogeneity and complexity did not ensure to society an improved omditlbn, > Conscious direction,, or telle action,' on the part of society would lead to the increase of human happiness- the sole indication of social progress.14 151617 * 14Hertzler. J. A.. Social Progress, p. 62 15Ward, L. F., Dynamic Sociology. Vol. II, p. 174 16Ward, L. F., Applied Sociology. Ch. Ill 17Ward, L. F., Dynamic Sociology, Vol. II, p« 161 CHAPTER II BIOOR^HT OF LESTER FRANK WARD Lester Frank Ward was born near Joliet, Illinois, in 1841. His early years were spent in rather great poverty and his opportunities for education were indeed slight.1 23 There burned within him, however, an insatiable thirst for learning. He availed himself, in oonsequenee, of every means to advance his knowledge. When, in 1860, the possibility of attending a school at Towanda, Pennsylvania, earn® to him, he gladly accepted the oppor^ o tunity and immediately entered the school# The outbreak of the Civil War in the following year interrupted his education for he enlisted and remained in the army until 1865 after having suffered bullet wounds at the Battle of Chaneellorsville • ** At the close of the war Ward was given a civil service appointment in the Treasury Department. Two years later he began to attend night classes in Columbian University (later George Washington ^Ellwood. C. A.. Op. Git., p. 527 2Lichtenbefger, J. P., Development of Social Theory . p. 357 ; ■.: --------- . 3Ellwood, C. A.. Op. Git,, p, 528 6 University) which he had helped to establish and in that institution he completed the required work for his a .B. _ A degree and later degzses In law and medicine, In 1881 he secured the position of geologist with the United States Geelogleri Survey while serving In this capacity he achieved considerable.renown for his outstand­ ing woric. in this field. The office of Chief Paleontolog­ ical Botanist was vacated in 1883 and Ward was appointed to that position in the same year. Here he remained for the balance of the years which he pissed in the service of the government, that is, until 1906.4 5 During all of these years Ward had been developing ah interest in the social sciences which were dominated at this period by the social philosophy of Herbert Spencer whose heavy-handed determinism ruled contemporary thought. Spencer’s writings seemed to be an effort to justify the current social system as the writings of Hleard© and other economists in the earlier part of the century had attempted to justify the growing industrial system with its vast Inequalities. At first entirely Spencerian in his thought Ward later began to question many of the Spencerian doctrines, espe- 4Ellwood. C* A.. Qp.Cit.. p. it? SIbld., p. 53? ? oially in regard to laissez faire theories and to the eoneept of government,5 6 Ward, nevertheless, adopted 8ome of the evolutionary principles which Spencer had incor­ porated into his system and he went hack even farther to borrow from the positivism of Auguste Comte,7 *9 IVardf a first publication appeared In 1883, This work comprised the two volumes of Dynamic Sociology in which he embodied a thorough refutation of the Spencerian theory of evolutionary social determinism,® It produced quite a dis­ turbance among the Spencerian theorists which was made greater by reason of the fact that its author was formerly counted among those who followed along the path which Spencer had marked,® That Ward had intended to stir the world of social philosophy into action against the re­ actionary and dismal outlook which Spencer had created is clearly shorn in the preface to Dynamic Sociology, "The real object of science is to benefit man. A science which falls to do this is lifeless. Sociology, which of all sciences should benefit man most, is in danger of falling into the class of polite amusements, of dead sciences. It is the object of this work to point out a method by which the breath of life may be breathed into its nostrils**10 5 ' ' ' .