Literature. — The whole of modern philosophy is concerned with the problem of the individual, but special' mention ma\- be made of: Spinoza. Elliics; Hume, Human Nature; Leib-
iiit . '- /',;,:'■ I.iK njiti; Kant, Anthropoioffie ; J. H. I ' ' 'i I' I ■ /' ■ -.iiUchkrit xind der individmtUn
/ . " ! - It^Lite Shaler, The Individual: A
> ' / ! 'I 'J ; Doud, Evolution of the Indi-
■ .'.'. l:- I . l: - ill-, -\r TheoL. esp. vol. i. 125-187 (Eng. tr. ); Lemme, i iir,t,tin-hf Ethik, esp. § 10; Kretschmar, Das ChristUche J'ersonlichkeits Ideal, 1898; J. R. Illing\vorth, Per- sonality. John O.man.
INDIYIDDALISM.-The word individualism is used in two senses, and the difference of meaning is constantlj' employed in order to discredit one set of ideas by arguing against the other. In a general way the uses may be distinguished by calling the one philosophical and the other political. Indi- vidualism, in the philosophical sense, attempts to derive everything from the intellect and the in- terests of tjie individual. However much a man derives from others, he ultimately depends, it argues, on his own judgment and li'is five senses ; and, however benevolent he may be, all his motives have their source in self-love. Descartes started to reconstruct our whole knowledge from the indi- vidual's knowledge of himself, and his successors naturally sought to construct our whole activity from the individual's love to himself. Shaftesbury and Butler liad to affirm almost as a discovery that benevolence is as true and real a part o"f human nature as self-love. Only after Hume had reduced this kind of individualism to sensation- alism, leaving the individual himself a mere series of sensations, and after Spinozism began to be
INDIVIDUALISM
INDIVIDUALISM
poured into the waters of speculation, was it seen that man could not be understood alone, but only in his whole context.
It is needless to prove that this kind of indi- vidualism is not maintained by the Scriptures. And still less is it necessary to show that it is not our Lord's reading of human nature. The creature that is made in the image of God is not made for himself. The creed that says, ' If any man will come after me, let him deny himself (Mt le--"), believes that it finds something more in man than even the wisest self-love to which it can appeal. The individual does not, it is true, lose in Christ's service. On the contrary, he will receive an hundredfold, and, over and above, life everlasting (Mt 19*^). But that is only after he has learned the secret of forsaking all, after he has been taught, not of his own self-interest, but after he has been drawn by the Father from all self-regard (Jn 6^'). This possibility in man, our Lord recognizes, was also taught by the prophets, who wrote, ' And they shall all be taught of God ' {v.*^}. To be taught of God means to be saved from this kind of indi- vidualism, to discover that it is not our right position and not our true selves, but is alienation from our true life and our true home ; it is to learn that not only is love part of our nature, but that we have never found ourselves at all tUl it takes us out of ourselves (Lk 17'^ Mt W).
Philosophical Individualism, however, is not only perfectly consistent with the appeal to authority which the other kind of individualism rejects, but it is almost entirely dependent upon such an authority for any e.xplanation of the social order. On the other hand, what we have called Political Individualism is frequently maintained precisely on the ground that man is not, in the sense of belonging only to himself, individualistic, but has his true social quality within himself. ' Individualism ' in this other sense means the rights of the individual over against authority, a position which does not, as is usually assumed, involve logically the other indi- vidualism, the individualism of every man for himself. It is not a denial of the necessity of a corporate existence or of the value of society. Its real opposite is Communism, and the real point at issue IS whether society depends on the individual or the individual on society. Both Individualism and Communism, of course, would admit a mutual inter-relation, but the question is which is first, the individual or the social institution, and wliich is to be our chief reliance, the good-will of the individual or the control of the social machinery. So far is this kind of individualism from involving individualism in the other sense, that it rather assumes that all the elements for the highest social state exist in each man, and would come to fruition, if only the external hindrances could be removed. On this latter question, it must be admitted, our Lord's attitude is mueli more difficult to determine.
Of this practical individualism there are several types. First, there is the individualism of Nietzsche, to whom every altruistic feelinsr is the mere unreasoning,' instinct of the herd. Tliat kind of individuahsm stood at the foot of the Cross, and said, ' He saved others, himself he cannot save,' and saw in the position the height of ahsurdity. Then there is the vigorous Philistine individualism of Herbert Spencer. It conceives man as a creature with five senses and ten Angers, who needs nothing on earth but a free field and no favour, whose chief duty to the human race is to secure its progress by making the weakest go to the wall. The text it most firmly believes in, in the whole Bible, is, ' He becometh poor that dealeth with aslack hand' ; and wh.at it cannot away with in Jesus is that He told people to give to everyone who asked, and to sell all, and give to the poor,— a frightful encouragement to laziness and mendicancy, and a most hurtful interference with the law of the survival of the fittest. A^ain, there is the individualism of Mr. Auberon Herbert and the Free Life. In its eyes men are cjuite free to part with everything they have, and it is believed they would part with it for the best purposes, if it were not that they are robbed and also debased by being blackmailed under the name of taxes. ' Bumble ' ia the true name and nature of all authorities, it having been their way in all time to muddle everything, doing it VOL. I. — 52