Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

stature. When we apply this fact to our special problem we see at once that extraordinary deviations from the norm cannot be expected to occur in a tribe of 500 or even 5,000, while among the vast populations of India, China or the Caucasian countries of America and Europe such favorable variants are likely to occur with considerable absolute frequency. These variations, as has already been suggested, need not even be excessive to produce significant cultural results. Again, we may urge the principle of minimal variations. A little greater energy or administrative talent may be just sufficient to found a powerful state; a slightly greater amount of logical consistency may lead to the foundation of geometrical reasoning or of a philosophical system; a somewhat keener interest, above the purely utilitarian one, in surrounding nature may give a remarkable impetus to the development of science.

"Now this puts an entirely different construction on the facts. Assume that racial differences are at the bottom of some of the observed cultural differences. This fact would not necessarily mean, then, that the average ability of the inferior races is less, but only that extreme variations of an advantageous character occur less frequently among them. This, for example, is the view taken by Professor Eugene Fischer, the physical anthropologist, a very firm believer in racial differences, but as regard variability rather than in point of average intellectual equipment. It is also essentially, if I understand him, the point made by Professor Thorndike. But precisely because the population of the several races differs so enormously, we are for many of them without a fair standard of comparison. Statistically, any actual number of measurements is only a small sample of an infinite series; but we have no means of ascertaining empirically, what the extreme variations, of which Veddas or Australians are organically capable, would be like. This, necessarily, leaves the ultimate problem of racial differences unsolved. Nevertheless, our considerations have not been in vain. They show, for one thing, how many factors have to be weighed in arriving at a fair estimate of racial capabilities, factors which are naïvely ignored in most popular discussions of the subject. We can, farther, say positively that whatever differences may exist have been grossly exaggerated. In the simpler mental operations, comparative psychological studies indicate a specific unity of mankind. Differences in culture are certainly not proportionate to mental differences, i.e., relatively slight differences in native ability may well have produced tremendous cultural effects. Since, finally,

cultural differences of enormous range occur within the same race, and even within very much smaller subdivisions, the ethnologist cannot solve his cultural problems by means of the race factor." 18

A. A. Goldenweiser in his book, Early Civilization, and in several magazine articles, is earnestly striving to remove what he calls "the modern obscurantism" of race distinctions. He makes the assertion that "no proof has been forthcoming of the inferiority of other racial stocks to the white." 14

Franz Boas, professor of anthropology in Columbia University, in various publications takes the ground that the primitive races are much more highly endowed mentally than they have been rated, that their backwardness in culture and lack of opportunity have been mistaken for lack of mental capacity, and that the differences in the culture of races are due to other factors than inborn capacity. In his recent article in the Nation, January 28, 1925, entitled "What is a Race," he says: "The occurrence of hereditary mental traits that belong to a particular race has never been proved. The available evidence makes it much more likely that the same mental traits appear in varying distribution among the principal racial groups. The behavior of an individual is therefore not determined by his racial affiliation, but by the character of his ancestry and his cultural environment. We may judge of the mental characteristics of families and individuals, but not of races." 15

Alfred M. Tozzer, professor of anthropology in Harvard University, takes the ground that there can be no bad consequences in the mixture of the most diverse peoples.1

16

Ralph Linton, of the Field Museum of Natural History, is of opinion that: "There is no reason to suppose that the United States of one hundred or five hundred years hence will be any the worse for

13 Lowie, Culture and Ethnology, 1917, p. 45. "Goldenweiser, Early Civilization, p. 6. See also "Racial Theory and the Negro" in the Urban League Bulletin, Vol. 13, No. III; and "Some Problems of Race and Culture in the United States" in the Proceedings of the National Conference of Social Work, 1922.

15 A fuller statement of his views may be found in his The Mind of the Primitive Man, New York, 1911; "Human Faculty as Determined by Race," Proceedings, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Vol. 43, pp. 301-27; "The Anthropological Position of the Negro," Van Norden Magazine, Ap., 1917; "Problem of the American Negro," Yale Review, n.s. Vol. 10; pp. 384-95.

[blocks in formation]

the gradual absorption into its white population of the present Mongol, Indian, and Negro minorities. The first two are numerically unimportant, while the Negroes, including those who already have a white mixture, form only about 10 per cent of the total. . . . Even the pure 'old American' is so hopelessly mixed that a little more alien blood is not likely to hurt him." 17

Among the other Americans who have expressed their belief in race equality are: H. A. Miller, of the Ohio State University, author of Races, Nation and Classes; G. E. Howard, of the University of Nebraska; 18 James J. Holm, native of Wisconsin and author of Race Assimilation, 1910; Charles S. Keyser, of Pennsylvania, author of Minden Armais, The Man of the New Race, 1892; Sylvester Russell, author of The Amalgamation of America, Chicago, 1920; J. E. Emery, author of Our Father's House, Philadelphia, 1893; W. J. Gaines, author of The Negro and the White-man, Philadelphia, 1897; Charles Stearns, author of The Black Man of the South.

The Negro authors in America, almost without exception, regard the doctrine of race equality as having been firmly established.

"An Anthropological View of Race Mixture," Publications of the American Sociological Society, Vol. 19, p. 76.

"American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 22, pp. 577-93.

CHAPTER 48

AMALGAMATION: ARGUMENT OF INEQUALITY

Authors Who Hold That Races Are Endowed with Unequal Capacities-Darwin -Romanes-Galton-Tylor-Keane-Marett-Gobineau-Taine-Huntington

-Dixon-Osborn-Angell-East-Grant-Wissler and Others

TUR

URNING now to the scientific opinion upholding the more traditional idea of racial inequalities, I will mention the following representative authors:

Charles Darwin in his Decent of Man states that the races of men differ very notably in mental faculties.1

G. J. Romanes, following the principle of Darwin, argues in his Mental Evolution in Man that the mentality of the races of men differs according to the degree of advancement of each race from the primitive state.2

Francis Galton, the founder of the new science of eugenics, believed that races as well as individuals differed in hereditary endowments, and he, more than any other man, has stimulated interest in the hereditary factor in all social problems.

Edward B. Tylor, an English anthropologist, holds that the "inbred capacity of mind" is one of the chief means of distinguishing races; and he points out striking contrasts in the mental and moral temperament of the Indians and the Negroes, and of the Russians and Italians.3 He speaks of the Caucasian as "gifted with the powers of knowing and ruling which give him sway over the world."

A. H. Keane, in his Man: Past and Present and in his Ethnology, accepts without question the theory of racial inequality and points out the innate mental traits of different races. Herbert Spencer in his Principles of Sociology regards the distance between the primitive and civilized races as very great.5

R. R. Marett, reader in anthropology in Oxford University, be

1 P. 27.

'Ch. XVI.

Anthropology, p. 74.

• Ibid., p. 113.

Vol. 1, Ch. VII.

lieves that difference in race "extends to mind as well as to body. It is not merely skin deep. Contrast the stoical Red Indian with the vivacious Negro; or the phlegmatic Dutchman with the passionate Italian. True, you say, but what about the influence of various climates, or again of their different ideals of behaviour? Quite so. It is immensely difficult to separate the effects of the various factors. Yet surely the race-factor counts for something in the mental constitution. Any breeder of horses will tell you that neither the climate of New Market, nor careful training, nor any quantity of oats, nor anything else, will put racing metal into cart-horse stock." "

G. Archibald Reid, an English scholar, in his book, The Laws of Heredity, says: "Like individuals, races differ in their mental characteristics."7

Among French writers the most celebrated apostle of race distinctions is Comte Arthur de Gobineau. In his Les inégalités des races humaines he attributes all progress to racial purity and all decadence to racial intermixture.

Gustav LeBon perhaps ranks next to Gobineau in attaching great importance to race differences. In his Evolution psychologique des peuples, he points out how each race possesses a particular set of psychological traits.

Hippolyte Taine, the great psychologist, historian, and art critic, says in reference to the races of Europe: "If you consider in time. the leading races from their first appearance up to the present, you will always find in them a class of instincts and of aptitudes over which revolution, decadences, civilizations have passed without affecting them." 8

Edmond Demolins, in his book Comment la route crée le type social, which is very similar in point of view to the recent notable book Character of Races, by Ellsworth Huntington, tries to show how the traits of different races have been the outcome of environment. In his Anglo-Saxon Supremacy, he draws very striking contrasts between the Anglo-Saxons and the French.

Some other French authors holding like views are J. Deniker, The Races of Man, p. 121; Vacher de Lapouge, "Laws of Anthropo-SociolAnthropology, p. 61.

'P. 426. Some other English authors taking the same view are Stewart Chamberlain, in Foundations of the Nineteenth Century; Thomas Lloyd, in The Making of the Roman People; and Charles M. Nottidge, in The Origin and Character of the British People.

Lectures on Art, Vol. 1, p. 216.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »