A second influence of diversity of occupation is a psychological one, which affects sentiments or points of view, rather than actual position. Division of labor does not promote equality in the sense of similarity; it tends rather to produce heterogeneity; but heterogeneity favors sentiments of equality rather than of inequality in a population. Under a complete system of division of labor direct comparisons between occupations or between individuals in them are difficult. When individuals are doing different things, no basis for comparison is present; when they are doing the same things, inherent differences are easily detected. It is much more difficult to make a comparison between a lawyer and a doctor than it is to compare two lawyers. When individuals specialize and become masters in their several lines each has his superior side; and the general tendency is to admit a rough equality sufficient for the purposes of a democratic society, rather than to attempt to grade different kinds of superiority. Within an occupation gradations and inequalities will necessarily occur, but they again will conform to actual differences in ability rather than to artificial distinctions. Division of labor therefore tends in the first place to distribute individuals in occupations according to ability, and, secondly, it helps to create a sentiment of equality by rendering difficult unfavorable comparisons. Complete democracy, however, requires also free opportunity of development for all; and, while this condition is not necessarily involved in the system of division of labor, it is only under that system that opportunity can be open to all. Under a class system in which society is held together by force, the lower classes are necessarily repressed. But in a society cemented by mutual interdependence, as occupations requiring diversity of talents multiply, it comes to be necessary and desirable that everyone should be given the opportunity to develop his highest capacities. Thus the system of division of labor contains some of the elements of democracy and tends to stimulate others not necessarily included within it. It is only on the system of division of labor that true democracy can be established. Division of Labor and Social Progress. Returning for a moment now to the outline of the three processes of social progress given in Chapter 5, - integration, variation, and selection, it will be evident that social progress, depending as it does upon the successful functioning of these three processes, will make a surer and swifter gain under division of labor than it ever could under any previous system. Division of labor promotes integration, by making each individual dependent upon others through a bond of self-interest rather than through one of force. It produces wider variation because individuals through specialization develop the maximum of heterogeneity. Therefore the system presents unity with diversity to a degree hitherto unknown in history. In the field of selection, while the extreme form of elimination through combat tends to disappear, that form which consists in sifting individuals and in developing and utilizing them in ways for which they are best fitted, is more likely to be perfected. The enormous progress which western civilization has made during the last century is neither a chance phenomenon nor a temporary one, but has been made possible by the gradual development of the system of division of labor, which brings to a very high degree of perfection the three processes of integration, variation, and selection, essential to social progress. REFERENCES FOR COLLATERAL READING ologique, No. 6, 1912. Social Organization, Pt. IV. CHAPTER XII THE UTILIZATION OF MEN Progress Depends upon the Utilization of Energy. Progress along economic lines, that is, adaptation to the environment, requires energy; and the more energy that can be controlled the greater will be the progress. The amount of energy in a human being, or even the amount to be obtained from such coöperation of individuals as occurs in a primitive group, though sufficient to sustain life, will not ensure much progress because it is inadequate for the achievement of a surplus. The great problem of production has been how most effectively to supplement individual effort through the control and utilization of motor power. The first source of power to be utilized was other human beings, because this form of energy was perfectly well understood and could be directed by the mere exercise of brute force. The next form of energy utilized was that of lower animals, which required admixture of sagacity with force. And the last form was the utilization of inorganic nature, which demanded knowledge and ingenuity, but in which brute force was of no avail. The reason for this sequence is that man has had to use the kind of force suitable to his particular stage of enlightenment. When the intelligence of the master is low, he can utilize only intelligent agents. As his intelligence increases he begins to understand and utilize less intelligent or inanimate instruments. The change in the force employed not only increases the amount of energy available but permits its utilization with a smaller amount of waste. At the same time the method of directing human energy has been made more effective. Forms of Exploitation Vary With Economic Conditions. The utilization of human beings has two aspects; first, the form or method of utilization, and, second, the degree of subordination to which the individual is subjected. The method of utilization in its crudest form necessitated the death of the individual, because captives were originally used for food or for sacrifice. When the economic system reached a stage permitting the profitable employment of additional human beings, slavery was established; in a later stage slavery was displaced by serfdom, and serfdom gradually changed into the wage system. The introduction of the slave system was favored by two sets of conditions: first, a form of economy or method of production suitable to the employment of slaves; and, second, the establishment of the family as a distinct unit, so that someone would feel responsible for the care and the enforced labor of the slave. As early as the hunting and the pastoral stages of existence, a few slaves could be utilized for personal service or for tending cattle; but it was the agricultural system which first gave opportunity for the utilization of slaves in large numbers. When an agricultural economy was combined with a militant organization of society, the contributions of masters and slaves were supplementary, and the militant organization furnished also the coercive power needed for the complete subjection of the slave class. With this combination slavery reached its highest degree of development and utility. The stimulus to slavery afforded by separate family life came chiefly through the introduction of private property and the consequent interest taken by the head of the family in the ownership of slaves and of the wealth which they produced. A factor of minor importance was the satisfaction which any individual feels, especially in the early stages of his development, in dominating other individuals. The enslavement of men and the domestication of animals have a similar psychological cause. The desire to subordinate other individuals is a natural outcome of the early and imperfect development of the personality known as excessive egoism. And the desire to domineer over others, or to exploit them, declines with the growing recognition of the rights of others and the increase in the sentiment of equality. While individualism, an agricultural economy, and a militant organization were the new conditions most favorable to the establishment of slavery, other considerations determined its profitableness and therefore its duration in different societies. As a system of production slavery is extremely wasteful, for the slave, having no personal interest in the product, performs as little labor as possible; and the work which is accomplished requires a maximum of oversight. Therefore slavery is possible only when there is plenty of rich land so that a fair crop may be grown with indifferent labor, or when the overseers drive the laborers so hard as to shorten considerably their period of productivity. The latter method is employed if slaves are so abundant that they can easily be replaced when worn out. Slavery, therefore, proves unprofitable, either when the land becomes so exhausted that it requires personal care and interest for profitable cultivation, or when slaves become so scarce, and therefore so valuable, that their living and working conditions must be greatly improved. When these changes occur it is found more profitable to substitute a system of rewards for one of compulsion, and for this reason serfdom gradually replaced slavery. Serfdom was a temporary expedient; but it was valuable in that it assured the cultivation of the land, and it provided a stimulus to labor by permitting the serf to keep the residue after specific payments had been made. With the growth of cities and the development of industry and commerce, serfdom was no longer adequate. The industrial system requires mobility of labor and freedom of contract. It prefers temporary, rather than life-long, conditions of employment; and it demands the right of differentiating efficient from inefficient labor. The rise of the money régime facilitated the introduction of the wage system by permitting payment for a particular amount of work, and such payment freed the employer from all responsibility for the care of the laborer. Therefore for the development of varied industries the wage system is the most economical and the most manageable, the economic necessity of the laborers ensuring competition for employment and therefore selection according to industrial needs. Degree of Subordination Depends upon Social as well as Economic Conditions. If we turn now to the question of the degree of subordination, or the actual condition of the |