Chapter 24 Chapter VIII Industrial Organization

Section 1 The doctrine of increased efficiency in organizations is old, but Adam Smith gave it new life.Economists and biologists have jointly studied the effects on organization of the struggle for existence; the most brutal features of this competition have been tempered by heredity. Writers of social science from the time of Plato onwards have been fond of studying the increase in efficiency which labor derives from organization.But in this, as in other cases, Adam Smith gave an old doctrine a new and better quality with the philosophical thoroughness with which he explained it, and with the practical knowledge with which he explained it. big meaning.In asserting the various interests of the division of labor and pointing to them the assertion that the pressure of population on the means of subsistence will weed out those races which, for want of organization or otherwise, cannot make the most of the advantages of the place where they live.

Biologists had begun to make great advances in their understanding of the substance of the differences in organization which distinguished the higher from the lower animals before the writings of Adam Smith had gained much readership; and more than two generations before Malthus's narration of the history of the struggle for existence of human beings led Darwin to conduct research on the results of the struggle for existence in the animal kingdom and the plant kingdom. This research finally led him to discover that the struggle for existence constantly plays a role of elimination.Biology has since done more than its share; economists have been drawn to the many subtle parallels they have discovered between the organization of society—especially industrial organization—and the bodily organization of the higher animals. Benefited a lot.In some cases, it is true, the apparent resemblance disappears on closer study: but many of those resemblances which at first seem most fanciful are gradually supplemented by others, And finally enough to explain the basic unity of action between the various natural laws in the material world and the spiritual world.The unity of this center may be explained by the general principle that the development of an organism, whether social or natural, increases, on the one hand, the subdivision of functions between its parts, and on the other hand There are not many exceptions to the principle of bringing the parts closer together.Each part becomes less and less self-sufficient, and depends more and more for its welfare on the other parts, so that failure in any part of a highly developed organism affects every other part.

This subdivision of functions, or "differentiation," takes the form in industry of the division of labour, expertise, knowledge, and mechanical development; Increased closeness and solidity of relations with each other—in the form of increased security of commercial credit, increased means of transportation and customs, such as sea and land, railroad and telegraph, postal service and printing press. The doctrine that the most highly developed—in the sense we have just said—organism, the one best able to survive in the struggle for existence, is itself still in the process of development.Its relationship with biology or economics has not been fully thought out.But we may turn to consider the main economic significance of the next law: the struggle for existence increases the organisms best fitted to derive benefits from the environment.

This law requires careful interpretation: for the fact that a thing is favorable to its environment does not in itself guarantee its survival in the physical world or in the mind. The law of "survival of the fittest" states that those organisms best suited to use the environment for their own purposes tend to survive.Those organisms which make the most use of their environment are often the ones which are most beneficial to what is around them; but sometimes they are detrimental. Conversely, the struggle for existence may fail to make the existence of what would be a very favorable organism: in the economic world the demand for any industrial establishment does not necessarily entail the supply unless it is more than a desire or necessity for such an establishment.

It must be an effective demand, that is, it must provide adequate remuneration or some other benefit to those who supply it, to be effective.The mere desire of hired hands to take part in the running and earning of the factories in which they work, or the need felt by bright young people for a good industrial education, if we use the word demand in the sense in which it is used—that is, the supply naturally and necessarily as the need arises— Neither is a requirement.This seems to be a harsh truth; but the most cruel feature of the law is tempered by the fact that those races whose members help each other without exacting payment, are most likely not only to prosper at the time, but to raise many descendants to inherit their beneficial habits.

Before the second quarter. Even in the vegetable kingdom, that plant which disregards the interests of its own seeds, however luxuriantly it may grow, will soon perish from the face of the earth.In the animal kingdom, the standard of family and racial obligations is often high; and even those beasts which we regard as typical of cruelty, exploiting their environment violently and preying upon living creatures without reward, must, as individuals, are willing to work for the benefit of their children and grandchildren.From the narrow interests of the family to those of the race, we see that among so-called social animals, such as the bee and the ant, the race survives in which the individual strives best to perform duties for society rather than for his own immediate interests. race of interest.

But when we speak of human beings endowed with reason and language, the influence of the sense of national responsibility on the strengthening of the nation takes various forms.Indeed, in the barbarous phases of human life, much of the service rendered by individuals to others has arisen, almost like that of the bee and the ant, entirely from hereditary habit and irrational impulse. But a conscious, and therefore moral, self-sacrifice soon followed; this self-sacrifice was fostered by the far-sighted guidance of seers, priests, and legislators, and was inculcated by fables and legends.Gradually, irrational sympathy, originating in the lower animals, broadens its range and becomes consciously adopted by man as the basis of his activities; High, national sentiment gradually develops into noble patriotism, and religious ideals are also elevated and purified.That nation which has attained the highest development of these traits, other things being equal, must be stronger than others in war, and in the struggle against hunger and disease;Hence the struggle for existence which at last gives existence to those races among mankind in which the individual is most willing to sacrifice himself for the good of those around him, and is therefore the race best suited to the common use of his environment.

Unfortunately, however, not all the traits which give one nation the advantage over another are beneficial to mankind as a whole.It would certainly be a mistake to place too much emphasis on the fact that warlike habits have frequently enabled semi-savage peoples to subjugate peoples superior to them in every virtue of peace; for such conquests have gradually increased the physical strength and The power to create great causes may ultimately do more good than harm.But if the mere fact that a nation prospers with or over another nation is not sufficient to be of service to the world, the above qualification need not be attached to the statement.For although both biology and social science have shown that parasitic peoples sometimes unexpectedly benefit the people on which they thrive, yet in many cases parasitic peoples exploit the peculiarities of that people for their own purposes. Do not give any good in return.There is an economic need for the services of Jewish and Arminian money merchants in Eastern Europe and Asia, or for the labor of Chinese in California, but the fact that In itself it is not evidence, nor even a very good reason to believe that such an approach would improve the quality of human life as a whole.For though a nation wholly dependent on its own resources cannot prosper unless it is fairly endowed with the most important social virtues; yet a nation which is incapable of doing great things of its own accord, without these virtues, can also depend on its relations with another nation. And prosperity.On the whole, however--with great exceptions--the best qualities are the most highly developed among those peoples which achieve survival and dominance.

The third section is ancient social class and modern class. This hereditary influence is most pronounced in social organization.For the organization of society is necessarily slow, and the product of many generations: it must be based on the customs and inclinations of the majority, which cannot be rapidly changed.In ancient times, when religious, ceremonial, political, military, and industrial organization were closely related and were indeed but different aspects of the same thing, almost all the states that were the precursors of world progress adopted a more or less strict social order. Class system; this fact itself proves that the division of social classes is well suited to its circumstances, and that in general it strengthens the nation or state which adopts the class system.For, as it is a governing factor of life, a country which adopts a class system cannot generally prevail over others if its influence is generally unfavorable.The preeminence of these countries does not prove that the class system is free from shortcomings, but that its superiority—compared to that progressive particular class—outweighs its shortcomings.

Next, we know that an animal or plant differs from its competitors by two characteristics, one very favorable to it; ; notwithstanding the presence of the latter, the former would still make the animal or plant successful: the presence of the latter would therefore not prove its advantage.In the same way the struggle for existence has brought into existence in man many traits and habits, which are not advantageous in themselves, but are bound together by a more or less permanent bond with other traits and habits which are great sources of strength.In countries where progress is chiefly due to military success, there is a tendency to oppress behavior and contempt for stoic industry; secondly, in commercial countries, there is a tendency to favor wealth and use it as a display, and in both tendencies there can be Find examples like this above.But the most striking examples are found in questions of organization; the class system, though it has great shortcomings, is chiefly its severity, and its necessity for the good of society—or rather for certain sections of society. special emergencies—at the expense of the individual—but the class system is well adapted to the special work it has to do, and thus enables it to prevail.

Going beyond the middle class and immediately speaking of the modern organization of the West, we see that the modern organization and the social class system constitute a striking contrast and have a striking similarity.On the one hand, rigidity has given way to flexibility: industrial methods, which used to be fixed, are now changed with bewildering speed; the social relations of a class, and the position of the individual within his class, were The traditional rules clearly stipulated, but now are completely changeable, and change their form with the changing circumstances of the time.But, on the other hand, the sacrifice of the individual to social exigencies as regards the production of material wealth seems in some respects to be an atavistic condition, returning to the conditions prevailing in antiquity under the rule of the class system. .For the division of labor between the different orders of industry, and between individuals within the same order, is so complete and irreconcilable that the real interest of the producer, in order to increase the increase which his work contributes to the general production of material wealth, is so complete and irreconcilable that , sometimes in danger of being sacrificed. Section IV Adam Smith is prudent, but many of his followers exaggerate the economy of natural organization.Talents are developed by use; talents are inherited by early training or other means. While Adam Smith asserted the general benefits of the fine division of labor and sophisticated industrial organization developed at an unprecedented rate in his day, he also carefully explained the failures of this system in many respects and the many incidents it contained. harm.But many of his followers, because of poorer philosophical insights and, in some cases, actual knowledge of the world, boldly argue that everything that exists is true.They say, for example, that if a man has a talent for business, he will necessarily use this talent for the benefit of mankind; At the same time, the same pursuit of his own interest will make others put at his disposal as much capital as he can; work, and nothing else; and his own interest will lead him to purchase and employ all machinery, and other things which assist in production, which in his hands can do more than they can in themselves to satisfy the desires of the world. the equivalent of the cost. This doctrine of the organization of nature contains more of the truths of the greatest importance to human nature than almost any other which cannot be comprehended by anyone who likewise would fail to study adequately for the purpose of discussing great social problems: , which is very charming.But to exaggerate this doctrine is very harmful, especially to those who love it the most.For, in the changes that take place around them, both good and bad, this doctrine will prevent them from seeing and eliminating the bad.It also prevents them from examining the question whether many of the broad features of modern industry, even if they were transitional, produced good effects, as class systems did at the time; Like institutions, they are chiefly useful in leading to better arrangements for a happier age.And the doctrine does harm by being liable to provoke an exaggerated reaction to it. The fifth section continues. Furthermore, this doctrine does not take into account the strengthening of organs through use.Spencer has endeavored to maintain the following law: If any exercise of the body or mind produces pleasure, and thus becomes habituated, the organ of the body or mind employed in that exercise develops rapidly.In the lower animals, it is true, the operation of this law is so closely united with that of "survival of the fittest" that the distinction between the two does not often need to be emphatically stated.For the fact that the struggle for life would render the lower animals not very happy in the exercise of functions not conducive to their welfare, may be deduced, and seems to be certifiable by observation. However, human beings have a strong personality and thus have greater freedom.Man loves to use talent for its use; sometimes nobly, whether indulging in the great expansion of Greek life, or under the sway of prudent and determined efforts for important ends; sometimes basely Talent, it seems, is a pathological development of a drinking habit.The religious, moral, intellectual, and artistic faculties, on which industrial progress depends, are not cultivated solely for the sake of what these faculties can acquire, but are developed by the use of them for the pleasure and happiness they themselves bring. in the same way that the more important factor of economic prosperity—the well-ordered organization of the state—is the product of a myriad of motives: many of which have no direct connection with the pursuit of national wealth. It is undoubtedly true that the physical traits which parents develop during their lifetime are few, if any, transmitted to their offspring.But the children of those who assert a healthy life, both physically and mentally, are born without parents who have been brought up under unhealthy influences which have weakened their mental and physical essence. There seems to be no real example of a relatively solid physique.But it is certain that in the former case the child is born better nourished, better educated, with healthier instincts, and with more opportunities for becoming, than in the latter. Caring for others and self-respect are the main causes of human progress. Therefore, it is necessary to study as much as possible: Is it beneficial to change the present organization of industry so as to increase the opportunities for lower industries to use latent intelligences, to derive pleasure from this use, and to strengthen these intelligences by using them?For it must be dismissed as wrong to assert that, if such a change were beneficial, it would have already been effected by the struggle for existence.It is the prerogative of man to extend his limited but effective control over natural development by predicting the future and preparing for the next step. Thus progress will be hastened by thought and work, by the application of the principles of eugenics to the enrichment of the race by higher rather than by inferior blood, by a proper education of the faculties of both sexes; and relatively slow.Progress is necessarily slow compared with the growth of man's dominance over technology and the forces of nature; a dominance that constantly and increasingly requires courage and prudence, resourcefulness and firmness, penetrating insight and farsightedness.And progress is necessarily too slow to keep pace with the rapidity of proposals for the immediate transformation of society on a new basis.In fact, our new dominance over nature, on the one hand, enables us to plan far greater industrial organization than was actually possible a short time ago, and on the other hand, places greater responsibility on in those who advocate new developments in social and industrial structures.For institutions may change rapidly; but if they are to last, institutions must suit men: if institutions change much more rapidly than men, they cannot remain stable. The very nature of progress thus increases the urgency of the warning that in the economic world nature cannot leap. Progress is necessarily slow; but remember, even from a mere material point of view, that changes which only increase the immediate efficiency of production a little, if they prepare and adapt mankind to a more efficient and efficient production of wealth. A more even organization in the distribution of wealth is desirable; and a system which renders useless the higher talents in the lower industries is highly suspect.