the man versus the state-第24部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


nstead　of　being　derived　from　the　law；　are　opposed　to　the　law。　For　example；　that　recent　Act　which　gives　to　a　married　woman　a　right　of　property　in　her　own　earnings；　evidently　originated　in　the　consciousness　that　the　natural　connexion　between　labour　expended　and　benefit　enjoyed；　is　one　which　should　be　maintained　in　all　cases。　The　reformed　law　did　not　create　the　right；　but　recognition　of　the　right　created　the　reformed　law。　　　　　　Thus；　historical　evidences　of　five　different　kinds　unite　in　teaching　that；　confused　as　are　the　popular　notions　concerning　rights；　and　including；　as　they　do；　a　great　deal　which　should　be　excluded；　yet　they　shadow　forth　a　truth。　　　　　　It　remains　now　to　consider　the　original　source　of　this　truth。　In　a　previous　paper　I　have　spoken　of　the　open　secret；　that　there　can　be　no　social　phenomena　but　what；　if　we　analyse　them　to　the　bottom；　bring　us　down　to　the　laws　of　life；　and　that　there　can　be　no　true　understanding　of　them　without　reference　to　the　laws　of　life。　Let　us；　then；　transfer　this　question　of　natural　rights　from　the　court　of　politics　to　the　court　of　science　　the　science　of　life。　The　reader　need　feel　no　alarm：　its　simplest　and　most　obvious　facts　will　suffice。　We　will　contemplate　first　the　general　conditions　to　individual　life；　and　then　the　general　conditions　to　social　life。　We　shall　find　that　both　yield　the　same　verdict。　

Animal　life　involves　waste；　waste　must　be　met　by　repair；　repair　implies　nutrition。　Again；　nutrition　presupposes　obtainment　of　food；　food　cannot　be　got　without　powers　of　prehension；　and；　usually；　of　locomotion；　and　that　these　powers　may　achieve　their　ends；　there　must　be　freedom　to　move　about。　If　you　shut　up　a　mammal　in　a　small　space；　or　tie　its　limbs　together；　or　take　from　it　the　food　it　has　procured；　you　eventually；　by　persistence　in　one　or　other　of　these　courses；　cause　its　death。　Passing　a　certain　point；　hindrance　to　the　fulfilment　of　these　requirements　is　fatal。　And　all　this；　which　holds　of　the　higher　animals　at　large；　of　course　holds　of　man。　　　　　　If　we　adopt　pessimism　as　a　creed；　and　with　it　accept　the　implication　that　life　in　general　being　an　evil　should　be　put　an　end　to；　then　there　is　no　ethical　warrant　for　these　actions　by　which　life　is　maintained：　the　whole　question　drops。　But　if　we　adopt　either　the　optimist　view　or　the　meliorist　view　　if　we　say　that　life　on　the　whole　brings　more　pleasure　than　pain；　or　that　it　is　on　the　way　to　become　such　that　it　will　yield　more　pleasure　than　pain；　then　these　actions　by　which　life　is　maintained　are　justified；　and　there　results　a　warrant　for　the　freedom　to　perform　them。　Those　who　hold　that　life　is　valuable；　hold；　by　implication；　that　men　ought　not　to　be　prevented　from　caring　on　life…sustaining　activities。　In　other　words；　if　it　is　said　to　be　〃right〃　that　they　should　carry　them　on；　then；　by　permutation；　we　get　the　assertion　that　they　〃have　a　right〃　to　carry　them　on。　Clearly　the　conception　of　〃natural　rights〃　originates　in　recognition　of　the　truth　that　if　life　is　justifiable；　there　must　be　a　justification　for　the　performance　of　acts　essential　to　its　preservation；　and；　therefore；　a　justification　for　those　liberties　and　claims　which　make　such　acts　possible。　　　　　　But　being　true　of　other　creatures　as　of　man；　this　is　a　proposition　lacking　ethical　character。　Ethical　character　arises　only　with　the　distinction　between　what　the　individual　may　do　in　caring　on　his　life…sustaining　activities；　and　what　he　may　not　do。　This　distinction　obviously　results　from　the　presence　of　his　fellows。　Among　those　who　are　in　close　proximity；　or　even　at　some　distance　apart；　the　doings　of　each　are　apt　to　interfere　with　the　doings　of　others；　and　in　the　absence　of　proof　that　some　may　do　what　they　will　without　limit；　while　others　may　not；　mutual　limitation　is　necessitated。　The　non…ethical　form　of　the　right　to　pursue　ends；　passes　into　the　ethical　form；　when　there　is　recognized　the　difference　between　acts　which　can　be　performed　without　transgressing　the　limits；　and　others　which　cannot　be　so　performed。　　　　　　This；　which　is　the　a　priori　conclusion；　is　the　conclusion　yielded　a　posteriori；　when　we　study　the　doings　of　the　uncivilized。　In　its　vaguest　form；　mutual　limitation　of　spheres　of　action；　and　the　ideas　and　sentiments　associated　with　it；　are　seen　in　the　relations　of　groups　to　one　another。　Habitually　there　come　to　be　established；　certain　bounds　to　the　territories　within　which　each　tribe　obtains　its　livelihood；　and　these　bounds；　when　not　respected；　are　defended。　Among　the　Wood…Veddahs；　who　have　no　political　organization；　the　small　clans　have　their　respective　portions　of　forest；　and　〃these　conventional　allotments　are　always　honourably　recognized。〃（24*）　Of　the　ungoverned　tribes　of　Tasmania；　we　are　told　that　〃their　hunting　grounds　were　all　determined；　and　trespassers　were　liable　to　attack。〃（25*）　And；　manifestly；　the　quarrels　caused　among　tribes　by　intrusions　on　one　another's　territories；　tend；　in　the　long　run；　to　fix　bounds　and　to　give　a　certain　sanction　to　them。　As　with　each　inhabited　area；　so　with　each　inhabiting　group。　A　death　in　one；　rightly　or　wrongly　ascribed　to　somebody　in　another；　prompts　〃the　sacred　duty　of　blood…revenge；〃　and　though　retaliations　are　thus　made　chronic；　some　restraint　is　put　on　new　aggressions。　Like　causes　worked　like　effects　in　those　early　stages　of　civilized　societies；　during　which　families　or　clans；　rather　than　individuals；　were　the　political　units；　and　during　which　each　family　or　clan　had　to　maintain　itself　and　its　possessions　against　others　such。　This　mutual　restraint；　which　in　the　nature　of　things　arises　between　small　communities；　similarly　arises　between　individuals　in　each　community；　and　the　ideas　and　usages　appropriate　to　the　one　are　more　or　less　appropriate　to　the　other。　Though　within　each　group　there　is　ever　a　tendency　for　the　stronger　to　aggress　on　the　weaker；　yet；　in　most　cases；　consciousness　of　the　evils　resulting　from　aggressive　conduct　serves　to　restrain。　Everywhere　among　primitive　peoples；　trespasses　are　followed　by　counter…trespasses。　Says　Turner　of　the　Tannese；　〃adultery　and　some　other　crimes　are　kept　in　check　by　the　fear　of　club…law。〃（26*）　Fitzroy　tells　us　that　the　Patagonian；　〃if　he　does　not　injure　or　offend　his　neighbour；　is　not　interfered　with　by　others：〃（27*）　personal　vengeance　being　the　penalty　for　injury。　We　read　of　the　Uaupes　that　〃they　have　very　little　law　of　any　kind；　but　what　they　have　is　of　strict　retaliation；　an　eye　for　an　eye　and　a　tooth　for　a　tooth。〃（28*）　And　that　the　lex　talionis　tends　to　establish　a　distinction　between　what　each　member　of　the　community　may　safely　do　and　what　he　may　not　safely　do；　and　consequently　to　give　sanctions　to　actions　within　a　certain　range　but　not　beyond　that　range；　is　obvious。　Though；　says　Schoolcraft　of　the　Chippewayans；　they　〃have　no　regular　government；　as　every　man　is　lord　in　his　own　family；　they　are　influenced　more　or　less　by　certain　principles　which　conduce　to　their　general　benefit：〃（29*）　one　of　the　principles　named　being　recognition　of　private　property。　　　　　　How　mutual　limitation　of　activities　originates　the　ideas　and　sentiments　implied　by　the　phrase　〃natural　rights；〃　we　are　shown　most　distinctly　by　the　few　peaceful　tribes　which　have　either　nominal　governments　or　none　at　all。　Beyond　those　facts　which　illustrate　scrupulous　regard　for　one　another's　claims　among　the　Todas；　Santals；　Lepchas；　Bodo；　Chakmas；　Jakuns；　Arafuras；　etc。；　we　have　the　fact　that　the　utterly　uncivilized　Wood…Veddahs；　without　any　social　organization　at　all；　〃think　it　perfectly　inconceivable　that　any　person　should　ever　take　that　which　does　not　belong　to　him；　or　strike　his　fellow；　or　say　anything　that　is　untrue。〃（30*）　Thus　it　becomes　clear；　alike　from　analysis　of　causes　and　observation　of　facts；　that　while　the　positive　element　in　the　right　to　carry　on　life…sustaining　activities；　originates　from　the　laws　of　life；　that　negative　element　which　gives　ethical　character　to　it；　originates　from　the　conditions　produced　by　social　aggregation。　　　　　　So　alien　to　the　truth；　indeed；　is　the　alleged　creation　of　rights　by　government；　that；　contrariwise；　rights　having　been　established　more　or　less　clearly　before　government　arises；　become　obscured　as　government　develops　along　with　that　militant　activity　which；　both　by　the　taking　of　slaves　and　the　establishment　of　ranks；　produces　status；　and　the　recognition　of　rights　begins　again　to　get　definiteness　only　as　fast　as　militancy　ceases　to　be　chronic　and　governmental　power　declines。　

When　we　turn　from　the　life　of　the　individual　to　the　life　of　the　society；　the　same　lesson　is　taught　us。　　　　　　Though　mere　love　of　companionship　prompts　primitive　men　to　live　in　groups；　yet　the　chief　prompter　is　experience　of　the　advantages　to　be　derived　from　co…operation。　On　what　condition　only　can　co…operation　arise？　Evidently　on　condition　that　those　who　join　their　efforts　severally　gain　by　doing　so。　If；　as　in　the　simplest　cases；　they　unite　to　achieve　something　which　each　by　himself　cannot　achieve；　or　can　achieve　less　readily；　it　must　be　on　the　tacit　understanding；　either　that　they　shall　share　the　benefit　（as　when　game　is　caught　by　a　party　of　them）　or　that　if　one　reaps　all　the　benefit　now　（as　in　building　a　hut　or　clearing　a　plot）　the　others　shall　severally　reap　equivalent　benefits　in　their　turns。　When；　instead　of　efforts　joined　in　doing　the　same　thing；　different　things　are　effected　by　them　　when　division　of　labour　arises；　with　accompanying　barter　of　products；　the　arrangement　implies　that　each；　in　return　for　something　which　he　has　in　superfluous　quantity；　gets　an　approximate　equivalent　of　something　which　he　wants。　If　he　hands　over　the　one　and　does　not　get　the　other；　future　proposals　to　exchange　will　meet　with　no　response。　There　will　be　a　reversion　to　that　rudest　condition　in　which　each　makes　everything　for　himself。　Hence　the　possibility　of　co…operation　depends　on　fulfilment　of　contract；　tacit　or　overt。　　　　　　Now　this　which　we　see　must　hold　of　the　very　first　step　towards　that　industrial　organization　by　which　the　life　of　a　society　is　maintained；　must　hold　more　or　less　fully　throughout　its　development。　Though　the　militant　type　of　organization；　with　its　system　of　status　produced　by　chronic　war；　greatly　obscures　these　relations　of　contract；　yet　they　remain　partially　in　force。　They　still　hold　between　freemen；　and　between　the　heads　of　those　small　groups　which　fo