¶46THIS book concludes a trilogy It is the third part of an inquiry into the foundations of society These three books, *The Ascent of Humanity*, *The Social Substance of Religion*, and this final one have all been prompted by one desire, the hope of discovering what it is that has held and holds human society together, why it is that men manage to live socially Our age has learnt to look for the forces which control human action and shape behaviour below the level of consciousness Prior to this all studies made by modern men (though they were possessed of much archaeological and anthropological information denied earlier thinkers) were vitiated by the rationalist assumption that individuals created society either out of mutual convenience-co-operation, enlightened self-interest (the Social Contract) or were kept organized as societies by the enlightened self-interest of one despot who coerced them by violence or debauched them with spoil
¶57In my first speculation — *The Ascent of Humanity* — I thought such a force could only be the relic of an instinct — the persistence of the animal group-consciousness right on into historic times The historical hypothesis then runs as follows that while no doubt the persons at the top of society were self-conscious individuals, the vast mass remained unself-conscious and thus capable of an unquestioning cohesion which was the real social cement, or to use Walter Bagehot's phrase, the binding in 'the cake of custom' I still believe that to be a factor underrated or completely disregarded by historians who never doubted that their own acute self-consciousness was and always had been possessed by every man, civilized or savage Further reflection, however, showed me that this cohesion is not great and in many societies for thousands of years has certainly not by itself been sufficient to prevent social dissolution. It was necessary therefore to look for some conservative force which might have power to appeal to primitive feelings of group loyalty and recreate a less self-conscious and competitive frame of mind among associated men. Religion was inevitably the answer.
¶58NOR IS IT RELIGION
¶59In my second essay of inquiry, *The Social Substance of Religion*, I therefore attempted to see whether the history of Religion would give evidence of this Was Religion, *au fond*, a method whereby men aroused in themselves an emotion of self-forgetful loyalty? Could there be under all Rites this psychological purpose? While men had pursued the specialized functions now become possible and necessary in the complescent community, their intuitive sense of loyalty had lapsed into the subconscious The main achievement of Religion was to make the individual able to recover his symbiotic relationship with his fellows Such an authority as Professor Royce has described the energizing force, in so successful a religion as Christianity, in its earliest and most successful years, as being 'devotion to the beloved community' Indeed there can be no doubt that much of the intuitive - perhaps one might almost say instinctive - interdependence of a primitive pack may be recovered by people, far advanced toward complete self-consciousness, if they will come together in small groups to concentrate their minds on a unifying idea That Religion has a very large social substance and that one of the chief reasons for the survival of religions, whose cosmology and theology have been discredited, is the social satisfaction the coming together of a congregation can give its units, is, I think, now accepted by most sociologists Further, the more modern sociologists allow, and I feel sure are right in allowing, that this satisfaction is not rational but
¶60PREFACE
¶61arises from the assuaging of psychological needs which exist now in the subconscious Part of the spirit of the self-conscious individual is neither self-conscious nor individual but requires a linkage with his fellows in order that he may be whole That part, however, has become separated off by the growth of self-conscious individuality and the formation of an insulated 'limen', or threshold of consciousness, between the self-conscious individuality and the subconscious
¶786What reformed religion, real, implemented, morality requires, is a method whereby the individual himself (the more powerful and wilful he is, the more this is required for his own sake and for society's) may experience extra-individuality, not merely hear a person he can seldom respect give proof (sometimes remarkable, sometimes not) of that extra-individuality, that collective subconsciousness or co-consciousness
¶857Meanwhile a desperate effort is made to stabilize the immense conquests Rome has united into a single state Save on the Persian front no force of an equality faces the legions Wealth begins to accumulate when through so vast a territory there is only one unstinted consumer to be kept People reflect how happy it would be if such a state were to become perpetual Here surely is the perfect balance, the individual desires, a condition wherein he can pursue his own private ends and be always protected, where he can remain for ever as he is, peace being a continual preservation of the *status quo* of society and of himself as an unresolved individual in that *status quo* Such a dream is illusory for man Some species can stabilize. As we have mentioned, the cockroach and the shark have remained unmodified for some 200 million years Higher forms of life, however, seem inherently more unstable — they must go up or down Man must develop or degenerate He is, as Nietzsche recognized, a transitional animal Stoicism's judgment has already been quoted 'He that is not getting better is getting worse'.
¶1042We have found that the latest knowledge shows that we are not — as we assumed — sprung from a fighting stock On the contrary our advance is wholly due to our having retained to the end, what all other forms of life to some degree lost, sensitiveness, awareness For that purpose, for that essential requirement of progress, we have kept ourselves free of defensiveness and all narrowing specialization As we have gone on in general capacity, receptiveness and adaptability we have had to keep on casting off any crust of custom, any unquestioned reaction, any quick, sure, hard efficiency, and constantly to break ourself out of any rut of safety This is the principle of foetalization. It is not enough merely to remain uncommitted As consciousness grows and becomes more intense, the living being has deliberately to open itself to new possibilities and impressions to which it has no prepared reply, to new riddles and questions to which it has no ready answer, to new interests which seem unwise, to new sympathies which seem unsafe The