follows is, therefore, to define the subject. And as the subject itself is developed in future ages, will the ideas associated with it be broader and deeper, richer and fuller.

But while a full development of a subject is its only exhaustive definition, a general definition is, nevertheless, possible and essential at the very beginning. It will give some idea of the scope and the limitations of the subject, of its relation to other departments of thought, and of the aim of the discussion ; and it will also promote a better understanding of the system in the process of its development. Such a definition of our subject is the more necessary, because the word sociology is so frequently used in a vague sense, or in a sense so materialistic as to unfit it for the designation of a department of Christian theology. The French philosopher August Comte introduced the word Sociology into literature. He invented it to designate what he terms Social Physics.* As he aims in his "Positive Philosophy" to supersede all theology and metaphysics, he has no room for the spiritual. The father of Positivism wants no God to influence society, but only natural law, just as in the natural sciences.† He regards man as merely a part of

*"Sociology, which is the term I may be allowed to invent to designate Social Physics." (Comte's "Positive Philosophy," translated by H. Martineau, p. 444.)

"The philosophical principle of the science being that social phenomena are subject to natural laws, admitting of rational prevision, we have to ascertain what is the precise subject, and what the peculiar character of those laws.” (P. 457.) "Banished for ever from all other classes of speculation, in principle at least, the old philosophies now prevail in social science alone; and it is from this domain that they have to be excluded, by the

SOCIOLOGY OF THE POSITIVISTS.

27

nature, and sociology, accordingly, as a part of physics. Comte, in fact, uses sociology, social science, and social physics, as synonymous terms.

Those who belong to the school of Comte use sociology in a similar sense. But some who reject the Positive Philosophy nevertheless deny, or at least ignore, the existence of God and the spiritual element in man, so that their sociology is also a department of natural science.

It is evident that, in adopting the term, we do not use it in the sense attached to it by its inventor and his school, nor in the sense in which it is used by Herbert Spencer. If it were so used, the qualifying term Christian would be altogether irrelevant. The use of that adjective implies that sociology is not treated here as a natural science, but as a part of theology.

But Chris

The use made of this word by Positivists and others has attached to it a materialistic sense. This seems to have brought it into disrepute among theologians, so that they have avoided it. Now the word is largely confined to systems and writers which are hostile, or at least indifferent, to Christianity. it is too good to be abandoned to infidelity. tian theology can afford to appropriate and assimilate all that is true and good, wherever it may be found ; and by adopting sociology, theology will enlarge its own domain, and will, at the same time, infuse a new spirit into social science.

conception of the social movement being subject to invariable natural laws, instead of to any will whatever." (P. 465.) The invariable natural laws produce all phenomena whatever; and the idea that Providence has anything to do with society is not thought worthy of consideration even. (P. 469.)

The sense in which Comte uses sociology does not necessarily belong to the word. The meaning attached to it depends altogether on the view taken of man and society. Whoever regards man as matter only, and society as nothing but a natural product, must, of course, regard sociology as a natural science, as much so as geology or chemistry. But if it is admitted that there is a spiritual element in man, and that there are other than natural forces at work in society, then sociology cannot be regarded as a part of physics. The meaning attached to the word, therefore, depends entirely on the view taken of man. The materialistic view makes it a natural science; while the Christian makes sociology in its highest sense, or Christian Sociology, a theological science.

Those whose idea of science is taken wholly from mathematics, will of course deny that there can be a Christian Sociology. They want to admit into science only that which is subject to unalterable laws, which laws can be understood in their origin and working; and which, when understood, will enable us to determine beforehand just what results will be produced. It may, therefore, be claimed by some that if sociology is truly a science, it will give us the power of prevision.* But what system of sociology

"We have to comtemplate social phenomena as susceptible of prevision, like all other classes, within the limits of exactness compatible with their higher complexity." "Thus, we may concentrate the conditions of the spirit of positive social philosophy on this one great attribute of scientific prevision." (Comte, p. 456.) He claims that "if social events were always exposed to disturbance by the accidental intervention of the legislator, human or divine, no scientific prevision of them would be possible." He also says: "Events ordered by a supernatural will

PREVISION IN SOCIOLOGY.

29

has given such power of prevision to any great extent? And if this is to be the test of the science, then the materialist, as well as the Christian, must despair of ever producing a social science. There are so many contingencies; so many things to be taken into the account; so many things which are very imperfectly understood; and so many which may be co-ordinated in myriad ways, that in human affairs prevision can, at best, be only very general and very uncertain. Prevision is possible only if all the laws are known, as well as the exact manner of their working. If, then, God were fully understood, and his working, and if man were fully understood, then there might be prevision in Christian Sociology; and then, too, the conditions of prevision in any science would be fully met. But the materialist can no more understand all the laws of matter, than the Christian can all the laws according to which God acts; hence his sociology can no more give scientific prevision than can that of the Christian. We cannot see, therefore, what is to be gained by excluding God from social science, as far as prevision is concerned. On the same ground, all

free will would have to be excluded. The recognition of a God does not introduce chance, or "accidental intervention," or arbitrary will, into social science, but only a factor already working in the laws of

may leave room for a supposition of revelation; but the very thought of prevision in that case is sacrilegious." "The old conceptions may evidently be applied to explain opposite facts equally well; and they can never afford the slightest indication of those which are yet future.” (P. 456.) Comte's notions of God must have been very crude, otherwise he would not speak of Divine acts as "accidental intervention;"

nature and back of them, whether seen there by natural science or not.

The aim of science, however, is not prevision, but to explain and to systematize. This is true of all the natural sciences. Some of them may admit of some prevision, as astronomy, simply because the laws are so perfectly understood in their mathematical operations. Were the laws of society equally well understood, then the future of society might be foreseen. But as it is, both the materialist and the Christian will have to be satisfied with probabilities. As sociology develops, its power of prevision may increase; but it can never attain the definiteness of a mathematical science, simply because its factors are not numbers. Here the highest wisdom begins with an appreciation of the limitations of our knowledge.

In its broadest etymological sense, sociology* is a discourse on society, or the science of society. As the science of society, it must give a rational explanation of society—that is, it must give and explain the nature, the principles, and the laws of human association. In the strict sense, therefore, sociology is the philosophy of human association, and embraces everything that pertains to man as a social being. While it includes all of man as social, it includes nothing else concerning man. It should be limited strictly to man in his associated capacity. Anatomy, biology, anthropology, and other sciences may have an important bearing on sociology, and may prepare the way for it, but they cannot be regarded as a part of it. There can be no social science, unless man is understood as

* The word is a compound of the Latin socius, a partner, an associate, and the Greek word λoyos, discourse.