The critical and far-sighted Lessing opposed Rousseau’s hypothesis of corruption by means of “civilization.” It was true, he said, that Athens, standing so high in civilization, and at the same time so corrupt, passed away; but the virtuous Sparta, did not this also pass away? Rousseau himself had to admit that the destruction of civilization would be of no use, that the world would then relapse into barbarism, and that the corruption would none the less persist. The philologist Muff,[463] discussing this question, added that if civilization had not come, vice would still have been dominant, and that civilization, involving as it does intellectual progress, provides also the means for counteracting vice.
Physicians and natural philosophers have long protested against the theory of the corrupt and degenerate “present.” For instance, a countryman of Rousseau’s, Dr. Delvincourt,[464] exclaimed:
“How false is the assumption of the fanatics and the pious who attribute to the moral corruption of our century the majority of diseases, and, above all, venereal diseases; who maintain that the race is degenerating; and who thunder an anathema against modern young men, whom they would gladly muzzle as we muzzle an animal.”
Must we, then, he asks, at a moment when civilization is marching forward with giant strides, have our ears wearied with sophisms which can no longer deceive even the ignorant masses? And he shows how since primeval times, everywhere, all over the earth, vice has been diffused. He rightly points to the innumerable monuments de turpitude of all ages.
About the same time (be it noted, more than sixty years ago) in Germany the celebrated natural philosopher Christian Gottfried Ehrenberg, in an academic speech with the distinctive title “The Fear that Progressive Intellectual Development will Lead to Physical National Degeneration: A Demonstration that this Fear is entirely devoid of Scientific and Medical Foundation” (Berlin, 1842), opposed the belief in the unwholesome influence of civilization upon the popular strength and popular morals. Of special interest to us are his remarks upon the alleged deleterious influence of civilization upon sexuality. He says (p. 8):
“The occurrence of puberty in warm climates at a comparatively early age (from ten to fifteen years), in cold climates somewhat later (from fourteen to eighteen years), is a natural measure of human intelligence and power; and if our sexually mature youths at school, at the time at which their development has naturally progressed to this point, experience also sexual stimulation, this is entirely according to the nature of things, and only imposes upon those in charge of schools, and upon parents, the special duty of watchfulness in these respects. Even if secret vice becomes general anywhere among young fellows in a manner open to regret, still, this does not mean that our schools are the cause of physical weakness, of overstimulation, and of deterioration of the people and of the epoch; it merely indicates a local deficiency in energetic purposive education, and a lack of the necessary watchfulness over the youths in the particular institution in which the trouble has occurred, or that the family life of the children thus affected is less strictly moral than we could wish; and the evil is only to be overcome by counteracting its especial causes. In many cases we may compare outbreaks of premature sexuality with epidemics of disease, which also find entrance through lack of sufficient care. Just the same is it in respect of the great mass of adults who, by exhortation and example on the part of those whose business it is to give them counsel, are in most cases so easily led in the right direction, but who, in the absence of such judicious treatment, often give way to the most unbridled licentiousness. The student of popular history will easily find numerous instances of cause and effect, now of the former and now of the latter kind.”
Ehrenberg comes to the conclusion, most encouraging to ourselves and to our time, and one which may be unhesitatingly accepted, that the entire history of humanity, in so far as that history is open to us, leads us to believe, not that the progress of civilization[465] has given rise to infirmity or to nervous overstimulation of the people, but, on the contrary, that as the centuries pass, our bodies are as powerfully developed as formerly, and that there is an ever-happier development of all the nobler human activities, such as can only result from an improvement in our mental faculties.
At the fifty-ninth Congress of German Natural Philosophers and Physicians, held at Berlin in the year 1886, the celebrated physicist Werner von Siemens, discussing the same problem in a formal speech, proved the nullity of the hypothesis of the evil influence of civilization upon the physical and moral nature of humanity, and expressed himself as fully convinced that
“our activity in research and discovery conducts humanity to higher stages of civilization, ennobles humanity, and makes ideal aims more easily accessible; that the coming scientific age will diminish poverty and illness, will increase the enjoyment of life, and will make humanity better, happier, and more contented with its lot.”
“Has humanity degenerated?” asks a celebrated specialist,[466] who, owing to the nature of his speciality, has been able to obtain exhaustive information regarding what is often believed to be a symptom of degeneration—namely, falling out of the hair and baldness—and he answers: