Book Read Free

Revolution and the Republic

Page 75

by Jeremy Jennings


  France in a quite remarkable fashion.

  As a religion, Saint-Simonianism was still-born and such was the manifest

  absurdity of many of its rituals and beliefs that one cannot but be reminded of

  the earlier failure to establish the religion of theophilanthropy under the Directory.

  Here was a religion which mistook humourless solemnity for authentic spirituality

  and which, in Enfantin’s hands, came dangerously close to being that of the sexual

  predator. With no meaningful concept of God, it provided an exemplary illustration

  of the pantheism that so disquieted Tocqueville. Yet it would be a mistake to regard

  the Saint-Simonian religion as nothing more than an amusing, if at times discon-

  certing, episode. This is so for the primary reason that it set a pattern for later social

  religions. This aspect of the question will be explored at greater length in the next

  chapter but here we might note the manner in which the ‘new Christianity’ sought

  to purge the old of its doctrinal impurities and erroneous beliefs whilst at the same

  time replicating the hierarchical and unitary model of the Catholic Church. Simi-

  larly, the new faith sought to re-establish social harmony and unity by putting an

  end to the philosophical doubt and uncertainty for so long denounced and abhorred

  by the Holy See. One sacerdotal caste was being called upon to replace another.

  In his day, one of the best-known advocates of the need for a new religion was

  Pierre Leroux.55 He had broken with the Saint-Simonians in opposition to En-

  fantin’s more outlandish views but over the course of the next decade he developed

  a sophisticated and appealing doctrine that encompassed many of the dimensions

  of faith traditionally addressed by the established Church. His ‘true definition of

  religion’, set out in what was his most notable work, De l’Humanité,56 sought to

  define both the deity and the immortality of our being. His central message was one

  of God’s immanence in this world—‘It is a God who is immanent in the universe,

  in humanity, and in each person that I worship’, he wrote57—and from this he

  concluded that there was a ‘harmony’ and ‘identity’ between humanity and man.58

  As we perfected ourselves, so we perfected others. We became ‘l’Homme huma-

  nité’. Leroux also shared the widely held view that some form of religion was

  necessary to ensure the stability of society, but unlike his Saint-Simonian brethren

  he did not believe that this entailed the creation of a new priestly caste. Rather, as

  his later writings were to reveal, he placed his hopes in the formation of a national

  church and in a religion without a theocracy.59 Leroux considered freedom of

  religious conscience to be of only ‘temporary value’.60

  54 See my ‘Democracy before Tocqueville: Michel Chevalier’s America’, Review of Politics, 68

  (2006), 398–427.

  55 See David Owen Evans, Le Socialisme Romantique: Pierre Leroux et ses contemporains (1948) and

  Bruno Viard (ed.), A la source du socialisme français (1997). The latter text contains an extensive

  selection of Leroux’s writings.

  56 Pierre Leroux, De l’Humanité, 2 vols. (1840).

  57 Ibid. i, p. vii.

  58 Ibid. 247–67.

  59 D’une Religion nationale, ou du culte (1846).

  60 Ibid. 130. In this work Leroux addressed Bayle’s hypothesis of the desirability of a society of

  atheists.

  354

  Positivism, Science, and Philosophy

  Leroux was not to be the only former Saint-Simonian who accepted the task of

  defining a religion of humanity. Nor, for all the admiration he evoked among his

  contemporaries,61 was he to be the most celebrated of those who did so. Saint-

  Simon was fortunate to employ two young men of exceptional ability as his private

  secretary. The first was the future historian, Augustin Thierry; the second was

  Auguste Comte, the acknowledged founder of positivist sociology.62 Comte joined

  Saint-Simon’s service in 1817, having been expelled as a student from the École

  Polytechnique along with the rest of his year, and he remained there until 1824,

  seemingly content to be described as Saint-Simon’s ‘pupil’. In those early years it is

  virtually impossible to distinguish the ideas of Comte from those of Saint-Simon

  but gradually the disciple became tired of the demands and mounting jealousy of

  his master and an acrimonious separation became the inevitable outcome. Never-

  theless, for the most part, Comte succeeded only in systemizing ideas found in

  inchoate form in Saint-Simon’s richly variegated corpus. Indeed, Comte was

  systematic to a fault.

  Comte’s best-known idea, first glimpsed in Saint-Simon’s Mémoire sur la science

  de l’Homme of 1813 but given its first full articulation by Comte in his Système de

  politique positive of 1824,63 was that ‘by the very nature of the human mind, each

  branch of our knowledge is necessarily subject in its course of development to pass

  successively through three different theoretical states: the theological or fictional

  state; the metaphysical or abstract state; the scientific or positive state’.64 During

  the first stage, the human mind directed its search to the very nature of being, to

  first and final causes, and concluded that phenomena were ‘products of the direct

  and continuous action of more or less numerous supernatural agents’.65 During the

  second, transitional, stage the search to understand the nature of things continued

  but now explanation was attributed to such metaphysical entities as forces, proper-

  ties, qualities, and powers imagined to be inherent in certain objects. By contrast,

  the third or final stage was, in Comte’s opinion, ‘the definitive mode of any science’

  and here the mind contented itself with relating observable phenomena to general

  laws. This was expressed by Comte as follows: ‘in the positive state, the human

  mind, recognizing the impossibility of attaining absolute concepts, gives up the

  search for the origin and destiny of the universe and the inner causes of phenomena,

  and confines itself to the discovery, through reason and observation combined, of

  61 See the sketch of Leroux provided by George Sand in Viard, A la source du socialisme français,

  304–5.

  62 See Mary Pickering, Auguste Comte: An Intellectual Biography, 3 vols. (Cambridge, 1993 and

  2009). See also Henri Gouhier, La Jeunesse d’Auguste Comte et la formation du positivisme, 3 vols.

  (1933–41) and La Vie d’Auguste Comte (1965).

  63 The first version of this text was published as the third cahier of Saint-Simon’s Catéchisme des

  industriels: see Œuvres de Saint-Simon, ix. 7–207. It was later republ. by Comte under the title of Plan

  des travaux scientifiques nécessaires pour réorganiser la société. In English see ‘Plan of the Scientific Work

  Necessary for the Reorganization of Society’, in H. S. Jones (ed.), Auguste Comte: Early Political

  Writings (Cambridge, 1998), 47–144.

  64 Œuvres de Saint-Simon, ix. 75.

  65 Stanislav Andreski (ed.), The Essential Comte (London, 1974), 20. This is a translation from

  Comte’s slightly later work, the Cours de Philosophie Positive, begun in 1826.

  Positivism, Science, and Philosophy

  355

  the actual laws that gove
rn the succession and similarity of phenomena’.66 Accord-

  ing to Comte, if all the branches of science passed through these three stages of

  development, they did not do so at a uniform pace. The classification of the

  sciences, he affirmed, was determined by their decreasing generality of validity

  and the increasing complexity of their subject matter, and this produced an order

  that corresponded to their historical emergence: mathematics had been followed, in

  turn, by astronomy, physics, chemistry, and physiology. However, there was much

  more to Comte’s endeavour than an attempt to define and defend a conception of

  positivist science that would, in his words, reduce ‘the totality of acquired knowl-

  edge to one single body of homogeneous doctrine’.67

  The second, and more important, task Comte set himself was to bring an end to

  the historical legacy of instability and disorder bequeathed by the French Revolu-

  tion. Here too Comte was working a rich vein already mined by Saint-Simon.68

  ‘From a moral point of view’, Comte wrote in ‘Considérations philosophiques sur

  les sciences et sur les savans’ published in Saint-Simon’s Le Producteur,69 ‘society is

  today obviously in a state of true and profound anarchy’. This stemmed from the

  absence of any dominant system capable of producing ‘a single communion of

  ideas’. From this, Comte continued, flowed unrestrained individuality, universal

  excesses of egoism, the predominance of purely material considerations, and

  corruption erected into a system of government. If this disorder were to persist,

  Comte concluded, there could be ‘no other outcome than the complete dissolution

  of social relations’.70 This was so, he further explained, because, while the social

  system which corresponded to the theological and metaphysical stage of our mind

  was disintegrating, the spiritual and temporal reorganization of society had yet to be

  completed. We lived in the shadow of what remained of the theological and

  military era. It was, Comte therefore wrote, ‘the great and noble enterprise’ of his

  generation to put an end to this crisis by developing the ‘organic doctrine’ that

  would determine the exclusive direction of all the details of society. This was to be

  done not by taking the backward step of restoring theological philosophy to its

  position of pre-eminence but by completing positive philosophy in such a way that

  it would replace theology definitively and this itself was to be achieved by extending

  scientific method to the study of society, by founding what Comte described as

  ‘social physics’.71

  Shortage of space (as well as the sheer tedium induced by Comte’s repetitive and

  dreary writing style) prevents a detailed examination of the methodological dimen-

  sions of this important argument. Central to it was the contention that social

  66 Andreski, Essential Comte, 20.

  67 Ibid. 39.

  68 See in particular Saint-Simon, Considérations sur les mesures à prendre pour terminer la Révolution

  (1820).

  69 Le Producteur, 1 (1825), 289–305, 348–73, 450–69; in English see ‘Philosophical

  Considerations on the Sciences and the Scientists’, in Jones, Auguste Comte, 145–86.

  70 Le Producteur, 1 (1825), 369–70. This argument was developed at greater length in

  ‘Considérations sur le pouvoir spirituel’, Le Producteur, 1 (1825), 607–14.

  71 Such, Comte announced, was the principal aim of his Cours de Philosophie: see Andreski, Essential

  Comte, 27.

  356

  Positivism, Science, and Philosophy

  phenomena were as susceptible to both observation and prediction as natural

  phenomena and that they could be investigated by means of what Comte called

  ‘the historical operation’. ‘The spirit of this science’, he wrote, ‘consists above all in

  seeing, through the detailed study of the past, the true explanation of the present

  and the general appearance of the future.’72 Specifically, Comte argued that

  social physics could be subdivided into the twin sciences of social statics, the

  study of the conditions of existence of a society, and social dynamics, the study

  of the laws of movement of a society. Together they studied the coexistence and

  the succession of phenomena and in doing so disclosed not only the interdepen-

  dence of all parts of the ‘social organism’ but also what Comte referred to as ‘the

  positive theory of order . . . [and] of social progress’.73

  What, at this early stage of his intellectual development, were the conclusions

  that Comte drew from these formulations? The most obvious was that the course of

  civilization was subject to ‘a natural and constant law’ and that this course was ‘only

  modifiable, to a greater or lesser extent, in its speed, within certain limits, by a

  number of physical and moral causes which can themselves be estimated’.74 The

  second was that, to date, the prevailing disposition of the theological and meta-

  physical school had been to ‘conceive social phenomena as arbitrarily modifiable to

  an indefinite extent’.75 From this had originated the harmful legislation and violent

  revolutions of the recent past. Next, only a ‘positive politics’ could enable the

  human race to ‘escape from the condition of arbitrariness’ and therefore it was an

  absolute imperative that politics should be elevated to the rank of the sciences of

  observation. Political science was to be a branch of physics.76 Comte further

  concluded—again echoing the voice of his master—that this elevation of politics

  to a new rank could only be effected by the scientists because, within the new social

  system dominated by industry, they alone possessed the requisite capacity and

  theoretical authority. No less Saint-Simonian in tone was Comte’s conclusion that,

  in an age of scientific politics, the government of things would replace that of

  men.77

  These views were most thoroughly set out in Comte’s magisterial Cours de

  philosophie positive, begun in 1826 and published in six volumes between 1830

  and 1842.78 It was this set of lectures that was to have an enormous influence both

  upon Comte’s contemporaries and subsequent generations, and not only in France.

  The English writer George Henry Lewes, now probably best known as the

  paramour of novelist George Eliot, wrote of it in his History of Philosophy that

  ‘A new era has dawned. For the first time in history an Explanation of the world,

  society, and man is presented which is thoroughly homogeneous, and, at the same

  time, thoroughly in accordance with accurate knowledge.’79 John Stuart Mill, as

  testified in his Auguste Comte and Positivism, was similarly impressed. Yet these

  same writers had scarcely a good word for such subsequent Comtean publications

  72 Le Producteur, 1 (1825), 356.

  73 Andreski, Essential Comte, 148.

  74 Œuvres de Saint-Simon, ix. 109.

  75 Andreski, Essential Comte, 143.

  76 Œuvres de Saint-Simon, ix. 193.

  77 Ibid. 131.

  78 (1830–42).

  79 George Henry Lewes, The History of Philosophy from Thales to Comte (London, 1867), ii. 590.

  Positivism, Science, and Philosophy

  357

  as Le Calendrier positiviste (1849), the Système de politique positiviste (1851�
�4), and

  Le Catéchisme positiviste (1852). To quote Lewes again, he wrote that ‘I have never

  been able to accept the later works as more than magnificent efforts to construct an

  Utopia.’80 J. S. Mill was less charitable. Of the Système de politique positiviste he

  simply remarked that it was ‘the completest system of spiritual and temporal

  despotism which has ever yet emanated from a human brain, unless that of possibly

  Ignatius Loyola’.81 For many of his readers Comte’s increasing preoccupation with

  the formulation of a religion of humanity seemed a betrayal of his earlier positivism

  and, moreover, something to be deplored.

  Comte did not see it that way, preferring to emphasize ‘the perfect harmony of

  the efforts that characterized my youth with the works accomplished by my

  maturity’.82 The evidence suggests that he did so with some justification. In his

  earliest writings, Comte inveighed against ‘the anarchic state of the intellect’ and

  damned Protestantism’s approval of the right of private judgement, commenting

  that ‘there is no freedom of conscience in astronomy’.83 In one of his most

  important texts of the period, Considérations sur le pouvoir spirituel,84 he affirmed

  his faith in the necessity of a spiritual power and argued that its distinctive function

  was the ‘government of opinion’ and the ‘direction of education’. To that end, its

  task was to develop the ‘system of ideas and habits necessary to prepare individuals

  for the social order’ and to secure ‘the voluntary subordination of private interest to

  the common interest’. The extent and intensity of this spiritual power, Comte

  remarked, could be gauged by observing ‘the Catholic clergy in the era of its

  greatest vigour and its most complete independence’.85 Temporal power would

  be subordinated to spiritual power.

  In the Cours de Philosophie Positive itself, the argument moved overtly at its

  conclusion from social physics to social ethics. Under the new philosophic regime

  there would exist both ‘a complete mental coherence’ and ‘the scientific ascendancy

  of the social point of view’. ‘When’, Comte wrote, ‘a true education has familiarized

  modern minds with the notions of solidarity and perpetuity that the positive

  contemplation of social evolution suggests in so many cases, then will be felt the

 

‹ Prev