question of organizing the industrial and scientific system summoned by the level
of civilization to replace it.’26 By rights, therefore, the industrialists and the
scientists should have led the Revolution but this place had been occupied by
lawyers who directed the Revolution ‘with the doctrines of the metaphysicians’.
The result was the occurrence of ‘terrible atrocities’ and the installation of ‘an
absolutely impracticable form of government’. The Revolution, Saint-Simon ob-
served, ‘placed power in different hands but it did not change the nature of
power’.27 From this flowed all its ‘strange wanderings’ and its final reconstitution
of feudalism in the shape of a bourgeois king, Napoleon.
France and Europe more generally, therefore, existed in an unstable situation of
transition. The process of social and political reorganization had not been com-
pleted and there remained a need to find a unified philosophical system capable of
replacing Christianity. To resolve the first part of this problem, Saint-Simon
recommended that, ‘for the sake of the general good, domination should be
proportionate to enlightenment’.28 This was a proposition that he reworked on
many occasions over a period of twenty years or more but, in broad outline, it
tended to take the form that spiritual power should be in the hands of the savants or
scientists and that temporal power should be in the hands of the industrialists
or producers. Various improbable schemes, ranging from a Council of Newton
23 ‘Sur l’Encyclopédie’, viii. 1–203.
24 Ibid. iv. 20–1.
25 ‘Coup d’oeil sur l’histoire politique de l’industrie’, ibid. iii. 147.
26 ‘Du Système industriel’, ibid. v. 10.
27 ‘De l’Organisation sociale’, ibid. x. 154.
28 ‘Lettre d’un habitant de Genève’, ibid. i. 41.
Positivism, Science, and Philosophy
349
composed of ‘the twenty-one elect of humanity’ to a larger Parliament of Improve-
ment composed of ‘forty-five men of genius’, were drawn up to implement this
formula, each one of them seeking, as far as possible, to transfer power to those with
the capacity to secure the proper administration of public affairs. ‘Governments’,
Saint-Simon declared in 1817, ‘will no longer command men: their functions will
be limited to ensuring that all useful work is not hindered.’29
But more than the social reorganization of society was required if the disorder
made manifest in the Revolution was to be brought to a close. To put an end to
philosophical and intellectual confusion, the sciences themselves had to be unified
and given a systematic ‘positive’ foundation. What was needed was an overarching
theory which, in replacing outmoded theistic explanations of the world, would
effectively work as the equivalent of God. Somewhat improbably this role, as was
made clear in the Introduction aux Travaux scientifiques du dix-neuvième siècle of
1807, fell to Newton’s theory of ‘universal gravitation’, the ‘single immutable law’
from which it was possible to deduce the explanation of all phenomena.30 Saint-
Simon’s broader point was that, if astronomy, physics, and chemistry had already
attained the status of ‘positive’ science, it was no less important that the methods of
scientific observation should be extended so as to embrace the study of man and of
society.31 Saint-Simon, therefore, unhesitatingly spoke of the ‘science of man’,
believing that upon the basis of ‘the positive organization of physiological theory’ it
would be possible to move the ‘social’ sciences beyond the ‘conjectural’ stage and
thereby turn morals, politics, and philosophy into a ‘positive science’.32 To that end
Saint-Simon contemplated the creation of a new Encyclopédie des idées positives
appropriate to the scientific system and enlightenment of the nineteenth century.33
Of singular consequence for this entire argument was Saint-Simon’s further
contention that it was not only possible but also necessary that we should pass
from a ‘celestial’ to a ‘terrestrial’ morality. Again this was a theme to which Saint-
Simon returned on frequent occasions, often giving his argument significant
changes of emphasis, but from his earliest writings it is clear that he believed
strongly that morality could be refashioned according to what he described as
‘purely human principles’. In its first formulation, for example, Saint-Simon
envisaged the establishment of ‘temples of Newton’.34 The content of this terres-
trial morality would be marked by a complete break from the Christian gospels.
Gone would be the maxim that one should do unto others as you have them do
unto you—such a principle, Saint-Simon observed, was only indirectly binding and
imposed no obligation on the individual towards himself—and in its stead was to
be the dictum that ‘man must work’. It followed that the most moral persons were
those engaged in science as their work was the most useful to humanity.35
29 ‘Lettres de Henri Saint-Simon à un Américain’, ibid. ii. 168.
30 See also ‘Travail sur la gravitation universelle’, ibid. xi. 214–310.
31 ‘Correspondance avec M. de Redern’, ibid. i. 108–10.
32 ‘Mémoire sur la science de l’homme’, ibid. xi. 25–30.
33 ‘Saint-Simon à Chateaubriand’, 219.
34 ‘Lettre d’un habitant de Genève’, 48–57.
35 ‘Introduction aux Travaux scientifiques du XIXe siècle’, 176–8.
350
Positivism, Science, and Philosophy
It followed equally that the propagation of this new morality would need to be in
the hands of a new ‘spiritual power’. Lay mathematicians and physicists would
become the new clergy.
Saint-Simon was similarly convinced that this morality should and needed to be
taught to all. He wrote:
The philosophers of the eighteenth century succeeded in having it generally accepted
that each person was free to profess his own religion and to teach his children the
religion he preferred. The philosophers of the nineteenth century will make people
aware of the necessity of submitting all children to the study of the same code of
terrestrial morality, since the similarity of positive moral ideas is the only link which
can unite men in society and, ultimately, an improvement in the social condition is
nothing else than an improvement in the system of positive morality.36
There would be a ‘national catechism’ and only those with proven knowledge of it
would be entitled to enjoy the rights of French citizenship. Taken as a whole, Saint-
Simon believed, these moves towards the development of the doctrines and
practices of a terrestrial morality amounted to the ‘perfection’ of what he continued
to describe as ‘the religious system’.
It is not clear at what point Saint-Simon began to appreciate the unsatisfactory
nature of these arguments but in 1825, the very last year of his life, he broke
decisively with his earlier secular pronouncements and declared himself the expo-
nent of a ‘New Christianity’.37 ‘Do you believe in God?’ the Conservative asked in
the opening sentence of Saint-Simon’s imaginary (and unconvincing) dialogue.
‘Yes, I believe in God’, replied the Innovator. ‘Do you believe that the Christian
religion is of divine origin?’: ‘Yes, I believe it is’, came the catechistic affirmation in
reply. The ‘sublime principle’ of this divine doctrine, the Innovator continued, was
that ‘men ought to act towards each other as brethren’ and, in accordance with this
God-given rule, they ‘ought to propose to themselves, as the end of all their labours
and of all their actions, the most prompt and complete amelioration possible of the
moral and physical condition of the most numerous class’.38 This constituted the
doctrinal heart of the New Christianity, although Saint-Simon did promise his
readers that in subsequent (but never to be completed) dialogues he would ‘propose
a profession of faith for the New Christians’, replete with its own morality, forms of
worship, and dogma.39 The New Christianity would have its clergy and they would
have their leaders.
Crucially, the ‘new church’ would be purged of all ‘existing heresies’ and thus the
greater part of Saint-Simon’s text focused upon exposing what he considered to be
the heresies associated with the Catholic and Protestant religions. Among these, the
Inquisition and the Jesuits and, on the Protestant side, inadequate forms of worship
figured prominently. Saint-Simon’s ambition was to purify the Christian religion
by divesting it of ‘all its superstitions and its useless creeds and practices’ and, in so
doing, to return it to its ‘original principle’ made evident among ‘the Christians of
36 ‘Lettre d’un habitant de Genève’, 218 n. 1.
37 ‘’Nouveau Christianisme’, Œuvres de Saint-Simon (1868), vii. 99–192.
38 Ibid. 109.
39 Ibid. 186.
Positivism, Science, and Philosophy
351
the primitive Church’.40 When restored to its ‘youth’ a ‘regenerated’ Christianity
would pronounce ‘impious every doctrine having for its object to teach men any
other means of obtaining life eternal than that of working with all their might to
ameliorate the condition of their fellows’.41 In a final rhetorical flourish, all princes
were called upon to become ‘good Christians’ and to recognize that Christianity
commanded them to ‘increase the social happiness of the poor’.42
As a religion, the spiritual inadequacies of the new faith were all too evident.
Devoid of any meaningful reference to the supernatural, what was being offered was
a social philosophy dressed up as religious conviction. Indeed, in this guise
Christianity was reduced to little more than a doctrine of social fraternity with
the earthly preoccupation of physical well-being posited as its only end. Neverthe-
less, Saint-Simon, it can be assumed, believed that he had correctly gauged that the
reorganization of society along the lines he had sketched in his earlier writings—
with its stress upon the temporal power of les industriels—would not be attained
unless it was accompanied by an equally strong emphasis upon the need for a
spiritual rebirth across society as a whole. Such, undoubtedly, was the mood of the
time, although what Saint-Simon had to offer bore little resemblance to either the
spiritual intensity evoked by Lamennais or the dark pessimism of Maistre.
The final years of Saint-Simon’s life were far from untroubled. In 1820,
following the murder of the Duc de Berri, he was placed on trial on the pretext
that his (by now well-known) parable had constituted an incitement to the crime.
Only some very nimble legal footwork enabled him to escape imprisonment. Three
years later, with his various projects having come to naught and suffering from
depression, he unsuccessfully attempted suicide by shooting himself. Despite this,
Saint-Simon continued to attract a sizeable number of young, able, and loyal
followers, and it was to be they who, in the years immediately following Saint-
Simon’s death, were to develop the suggestive ideas found in the Nouveau Chris-
tianisme into a full-blown religious creed built around a Church (formally estab-
lished on Christmas Day 1829) with its own rituals, colourful regalia, calendar, and
intricate hierarchy of apostles, priests, missionaries, and disciples.43
‘The children of Saint-Simon’, as the members of the new Church habitually
referred to each other, gave themselves ‘the mission of progressively converting the
world to this universal communion’ and the improvement of the condition of the
poorest and most numerous class now became unambiguously ‘the will of God’.44
40 Ibid. 163, 178–9.
41 Ibid. 164.
42 Ibid. 192.
43 The first significant reformulation of Saint-Simonian doctrine came in the form of the collective
text Doctrine de Saint-Simon: Exposition Première Année 1828–1829 (1831). See Georges Weill, L’École
Saint-Simonienne: Son Histoire, son Influence jusqu’à nos jours (1896); Sebastien Charléty, Histoire du
Saint-Simonisme 1825–1864 (1896) and Henry-René d’Allemagne, Les Saint-Simoniens 1827–1837
(1930); in English see Robert E. Carlisle, The Proffered Crown: Saint-Simonianism and the Doctrine of
Hope (Baltimore, Md., 1987). Allemagne’s book contains reproductions of some wonderful archive
material.
44 A wide-ranging selection of Saint-Simonian texts, bound together in 2 vols., can be found at the
library of the Musée social in Paris. Reading these texts is a challenging experience, as it is hard not to
conclude that many of the meetings held by the Saint-Simonians were characterized by collective
hysteria.
352
Positivism, Science, and Philosophy
Prosper Enfantin45 and Saint-Amand Bazard, the family’s two holy Fathers, set
about leading the faithful to a ‘new life’ where war, exploitation, and hatred would
cease forever. Central to the new Church’s doctrine, and the cause of repeated
debate, was the proclamation of equality between men and women, between the
proletarian and the victim of prostitution and adultery.46 With this were soon to
come schisms,47 excommunications, and, most bizarre of all, the prolonged and
unsuccessful search for a female Messiah. Enfantin, supreme pontiff of the move-
ment following Bazard’s embittered departure and now hailed by his remaining
followers as ‘the most moral man’ of his time,48 commenced a further reformula-
tion of doctrine in a series of lofty pronouncements beginning in late November
1831. He now reworked the Christian concept of the Trinity into the central
precept of the Saint-Simonian religion, claiming that, although unperceived, it had
been present on every page of the Nouveau Christianisme.49 The contraries of man
and the world, he maintained, were united in God; the self and the non-self in the
Infinite, to the point where all antagonism would be overcome.50 ‘Our apostolic
work’, Enfantin declared, ‘consists principally in the Rehabilitation of the Flesh
through the creation of a new cult, the organization of industry and the appeal to
women.’51 Matters came to a head when, in the spring of 1832, the Père Enfantin
was placed on trial for offending public morality.52 For Enfantin the religious and
the erotic had become inextricably intertwined and his un
conventional views on
the sexual emancipation of women were causing increasing public controversy, as
well as opposition from many adherents of the new religion.53 Following Enfantin’s
release from prison, the community, having established itself in monastery-like
seclusion at Ménilmontant on the eastern outskirts of Paris, was dissolved. Enfantin
himself departed for Egypt, from where he returned in 1837, many of his remain-
ing followers having died from the plague and with his efforts to build a barrage
across the Nile a failure. The other Saint-Simonians, including such men as Michel
45 Sebastien Charléty, Enfantin (1930); Henry-René d’Allemagne, Prosper Enfantin et les Grands
Entreprises du XIXe siècle (1935).
46 Jehan d’Ivray, L’Aventure Saint-Simonienne et les Femmes (1930); Michèle Riot-Sarcey, De la
liberté des femme: Lettres de dames au Globe (1831–1832) (1992); Claire Goldberg Moses, French
Feminism in the Nineteenth Century (Albany, NY, 1984), 41–60.
47 See Armand Cuvillier, Un schisme Saint-Simonien: Les Origines de l’École buchézienne (1920).
Buchez left the movement in 1829 but the most significant schism came in Nov. 1831 when Bazard
and nineteen ‘dissidents’ left after a bitter dispute with Enfantin: see Réunion Générale de la Famille:
Séances des 19 et 21 novembre (1831). Subsequent to this, Bazard’s replacement in the hierarchy,
Olinde Rodrigues, was also to depart in Feb. 1832. See the two texts cited by Rodrigues below. If
Rodrigues accepted the legitimacy of divorce, he could not accept Enfantin’s view that children should
not know the name of their father.
48 Cérémonie du 27 novembre (1831), 7. These were the words of Rodrigues.
49 Œuvres d’Enfantin, 3 vols. (1868).
50 Ibid. i. 15.
51 Ibid. i. 136.
52 See Marcel Pournin, Le Procès des Saint-Simoniens (1907).
53 See e.g. two pamphlets written by Olinde Rodrigues, ‘Aux Saint-Simoniens’ (1832) and ‘Bases de
la loi morale proposées à l’acceptation des femmes’ (1832). Enfantin was openly accused of immorality
by other Saint-Simonians.
Positivism, Science, and Philosophy
353
Chevalier,54 went their various ways, contributing subsequently to the life of
Revolution and the Republic Page 74