[19]. This view of purpose is not necessarily antagonistic to the “interest” school of sociology, but we may perhaps look forward to a new and deeper analysis of self-interest. And the view here put forward is not incompatible with the “objective” theory of association (see [ch. XXIX]) nor with the teleological school of jurisprudence (see [ch. XV]), it merely emphasizes another point of view—a point of view which tends to synthesize the “subjective” and “objective” theories of law. But those jurists who say that a group is governed by its purpose and leave the matter there are making a thing-in-itself of the purpose; we are governed by the purpose, yes, but we are all the time evolving the purpose. Modern jurists wish a dynamic theory of law—only such a conception of purpose as is revealed by group psychology will give value to a teleological school of jurisprudence.
[20]. In a relation even of two I am not faithful to the other person but to my conception of the relation in the whole. Loyalty is always to the group idea not to the group-personnel. This must change our idea of patriotism.
[21]. See[ ch. XV], “From Contract to Community.”
[22]. This is the principle of the vote in a democracy (see [ch. XXI]). This must not, however, be confused with the old Hegelianism (see [ch. XXIX] on “Sovereignty”).
[23]. In art this is what impressionism has meant. In the era before impressionism art was in a static phase, that is, artists were working at fixed relations. The “balance” of modern artists does not suggest fixedness, but relation subject directly to the laws of the whole.
[24]. I speak of it as later because the biological analogy was different from the organism of mediæval doctrine.
[25]. See [ch. XXX], “Political Pluralism and Functionalism.”
[27]. See [ch. XXI]. I have been told that the distinction between the organic and the psychic theory of society is merely academic. But no one should frame amendments on the initiative and referendum without this distinction; no one without it can judge wisely the various schemes now being proposed for occupational representation—something every one of us will have soon to do.
[28]. It must be remembered, however, that these welfare arrangements are often accompanied by truly social motives, and experiments looking towards a more democratic organization of industries.