STOP
Early Journal Content on JSTOR, Free to Anyone in the World
This article is one of nearly 500,000 scholarly works digitized and made freely available to everyone in
the world by JSTOR.
Known as the Early Journal Content, this set of works include research articles, news, letters, and other
writings published in more than 200 of the oldest leading academic journals. The works date from the
mid-seventeenth to the early twentieth centuries.
We encourage people to read and share the Early Journal Content openly and to tell others that this
resource exists. People may post this content online or redistribute in any way for non-commercial
purposes.
Read more about Early Journal Content at http://about.jstor.org/participate-jstor/individuals/early-
journal-content .
JSTOR is a digital library of academic journals, books, and primary source objects. JSTOR helps people
discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content through a powerful research and teaching
platform, and preserves this content for future generations. JSTOR is part of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit
organization that also includes Ithaka S+R and Portico. For more information about JSTOR, please
contact support@jstor.org.
RELIGION IN TERMS OF SOCIAL
CONSCIOUSNESS
EDWARD SCRIBNER AMES
University of Chicago
As a working conception of religion I offered some years ago
this statement, "consciousness of the highest social values." 1
By consciousness was meant appreciation and the active
attitude of supporting and perpetuating. There was no
expectation of bringing all students of the subject to agreement
upon that definition, but it is surprising to see how varied
and lively the disagreement has been. Much of it has been
due to neglecting the word "highest" and not a little to
different uses of the term "social."
Among the recent critics of this conception is Professor
James B. Pratt, whose book The Religious Consciousness was
the most important contribution of last year to the psychology
of religion. His treatment of "society" and the "social" is
not always easy to understand. A comparison of different
passages suggests that the difficulty of understanding him
springs from a conflict in his own thought. After defining
religion as "the serious social attitude" toward the Determiner
of Destiny, he remarks that he uses the word social with con-
siderable misgiving. He asserts that the religious attitude
has only a "faint touch" of the social quality and in a merely
incipient way. His general psychological position is respon-
sible for this. That view is of the older individualistic type
in which the individual is represented as in possession of
certain instincts from birth the expression and direction of
which are largely due to the influence of society. Having
made sure of this individualistic equipment to begin with,
1 The Psychology of Religious Experience (ioio).
264
RELIGION IN TERMS OF SOCIAL CONSCIOUSNESS 265
Professor Pratt becomes quite enthusiastic concerning the
value of social experience. "Once we have recognized the
original psychical endowment of the individual, the influence of
society in making him what he is can hardly be exaggerated" —
society "to some extent genuinely constitutes him."
Professor Pratt here follows William James whose view of
the instincts was formulated before the development of recent
important conceptions of social psychology in this field.
James enumerated a list of instincts belonging to the individual
as if they were separate, discrete functions. Later investiga-
tors are dropping the notion of specific instincts. They speak
of impulsive tendencies and attitudes as phases of complex
organic behavior. Moreover, these tendencies are conceived
as elicited and conditioned by social experience. In this view
human nature is always and thoroughly social, involving the
interaction of social stimulus and response. Thought, of the
most private character, becomes a conversation between
the different "selves" within the imagination. These selves
are developed through participation in social relations, and
consciousness is itself an interplay of roles gathered from
intercourse with one's fellows. The force of this position may
be emphasized by trying to imagine what would happen in the
oft-conjectured situation of an infant left absolutely alone
and yet maintaining life to years of maturity. We have no
reason to suppose he would possess any human traits. It is
not justifiable to assume that such a being would possess a
"rational nature." But positing for him only the normal
brain and nervous system of the human animal and the
ordinary social medium, the infant becomes rational and
sympathetic and civilized. The individual is not then to be
set off against society, nor counted simply as one unit which
may be associated with similar units to produce an aggre-
gate called society. The mind and "soul" are social through
and through. The individual is real enough, but his reality
is within the social situation. Professor Pratt does not take
266 THE JOURNAL OF RELIGION
seriously enough the following words which he quotes with
approval from Professor Cooley: "A separate individual is
an abstraction unknown to experience, and so likewise is
society when regarded as something apart from individuals."
In the definition religion is identified with the highest social
consciousness — not with social consciousness in general. By
"highest" is meant the most intimate and vital phases of the
social consciousness. This highest social consciousness is not
the same in all peoples and times, but every people and every
time have a scale of values in which certain interests are felt
to be the most important. These constitute their religious
values. There is here suggested an index to the religion of
any race in any stage of development. To discover the
religion of the natives of Australia, examine their ceremonials
and their social organization and find what they are most
concerned about. The same method is reliable for studying
the religions of India and the United States. It is of course
recognized that modern society is complex and really consists
of many groups. The religion of any group in American
life is found when the deepest common interests of that group
are discovered. So far as we have a national religious life it
may be seen in those most dominant concerns of the whole
people. Some observers think our God is Mammon. Some
think it is Efficiency. Some think it is Democracy. But the
truth is that the national consciousness of this country is not
sufficiently unified and homogeneous as yet to afford clear
and convincing evidence of what is the highest American social
consciousness. And for that very good reason we are in a
profound transition period attended with much confusion as
to what our religion is or should be!
This suggests why religion is identified in modern society
with morality. 1 Religion is older than critical, reflective
1 J. H. Leuba, in " The Meaning of 'Religion,' " Journal of Philosophy, February 3,
1021, objects to this use of the term religion. It is hardly a greater change, however,
than in the word "government" to denote democracy as well as monarchy.
RELIGION IN TERMS OF SOCIAL CONSCIOUSNESS 267
morality; but when the highest social values are lifted out of
the realm of custom, religion tends to become identified with
the more consciously chosen ideals. Superstition and magic
atrophy and the rationally appraised and experimentally
evaluated focus attention. Morality is enlarging into social
idealism in the modern world and this social idealism is
precisely the quality of religion.
Other criticisms may be met by pointing out that the
conception of religion in terms of the highest social conscious-
ness affords a new and fruitful view of the meaning of God.
It is interesting to note that Professor Pratt defines religion as
"the serious and social attitude of individuals or communities
toward the power or powers which they conceive as having
ultimate control over their interests and destinies." That is
a good definition. It may be used with entire satisfaction by
one who identifies religion with the ideal social values. These
values are embodied in different objects according to the life-
habits and political organization of the group. For the Malay
rice is the god; for the American Indian, corn; for the Aino,
the bear; for the primitive Hebrew, the sheep. For the later
Hebrew, God is in the form of a man and a king. Whatever
the symbol, the substance of the idea of God, the objective
reality, is the Spirit of the group whose awesome will is enforced
through the commandments of social custom. Social approval
and social ostracism are the flaming swords which guard the
sanctities of life both in savage and in civilized communities.
Professor Pratt calls this conception of God "subjective,"
but it certainly is not subjective in the sense of being individu-
alistic. And it is obviously not a "mere" idea — occurring
simultaneously in the heads of a number of men. It is the
Determiner of Destiny, to use his favorite expression. An
analogous case may be found in the familiar use of "Alma
Mater" to designate an institution of learning. Is the Alma
Mater a mere idea ? Is it a fiction ? Is it subjective ? Has
it not all the reality of the college buildings, the faculties,
268 THE JOURNAL OF RELIGION
donors, students, and the social influence which flows through
the whole body of traditions ? Viewed in this way, an alumnus
may have perception of his Alma Mater, may derive help
from her in the form of recommendations, may sing praises to
her and be responsive to her will and thought. Hearing a
company of students singing, a spectator might wonder
whether they thought there actually was a particular woman
to whom their songs were addressed. But he who should
decide that the Alma Mater was therefore unreal and merely
subjective would also be mistaken. Professor Pratt insists
that his definition includes among the religious many an
atheist (p. 5). Such an admission raises serious questions
concerning the nature of the Determiner of Destiny. At least
the highest social values do not admit of their negation on the
part of those who are religious. To be antisocial is far deeper
heresy than to be atheistic with reference to the Determiner
of Destiny as often conceived!
Another misapprehension with reference to the social
appears in the conception of its relation to the cosmos or nature.
Durkheim and Cornford have shown that the cosmos is
socially determined. 1 They hold that for primitive races the
notions of space, time, force, motion, and material objects,
are conditioned and comprehended within the social. Here,
to be sure, arises all the array of conflicting metaphysical
theories. But nevertheless the realist who prefers to insist
that the order of nature and material objects exist independ-
ently of the social medium precisely as he conceives them
assumes the burden of proof. That is supposed to have been
shown long ago by Immanuel Kant. For him nature is
phenomenal. The sociologists of the Durkheim school have
given an empirical psychological account of the way in which
nature is conformed to the notions and attitudes of the social
group. What, in these scientific days, is regarded as an
1 Durkheim, Elementary Forms of the Religious Life; Cornford, From Religion to
Philosophy.
RELIGION IN TERMS OF SOCIAL CONSCIOUSNESS 269
independent material order appears in their writings as a
complex of social concepts — collective representations. This
does not make nature subjective in the sense of reducing it to
images in the brains of men. It only points out that objects
as known are objects of social usage and convention. They
are matters of value and not only matters of fact.
The crux of the problem largely concerns the doctrine of
creation and the enigmatic question of bare existence. The
picture of a Deity fashioning the worlds and all that in them is,
is so vivid that few realize that it has little if any place in a
genuinely scientific view of the world. The idea of the begin-
ning of matter and of life is an abstract metaphysical question
probably beyond the possibility of any real answer. The kind
of answer which the mind frames is a poetic, imaginative
account cast in the mold of the prevailing culture. Primitives
tell marvelous tales of how a giant rabbit or beetle or kangaroo
or a very anthropomorphic god created all things out of dust
or mist. All such stories bear the marks of the social group
from which they arise. They gain religious significance in so
far as they aid in maintaining taboos and in magnifying
reverence for the totem deities. This poetry and imagery of
the evaluating social consciousness continues in chastened and
elevated forms, as in the writings of Dante and Milton, to
serve social, idealistic ends, but it is not to be mistaken for
literal representation of "things in themselves."
The practical attitude of the modern social spirit toward
nature illustrates still more impressively that nature is instru-
mental for the great ideal ends of religion. Instead of an
external, providential order before which man is dumb and
submissive, nature has become increasingly flexible and sub-
servient to social requirements. We no longer regard disease
as the visitation of the wrath of God upon men for their sins.
We look for the causes and elicit by experimentation from
nature herself means of prevention and cure. Nature has
been changed so that some diseases no longer occur. She is
270 THE JOURNAL OF RELIGION
made to yield crops where formerly all was desolation. New
species of plants have been grown. Unimagined highways
have been opened in the air and over seas and through the
mountains. Human beings have made nature serve their
social needs by marvelous means of communication and by
wonderful devices for preserving records of experience in the
printed page and in pictures. Miracles have been performed
upon the human body and others are in preparation. The
mind itself is in the making through better understanding of
methods of education.
The sense of participating in a social experience of this
character and magnitude is not lacking in genuine religious
significance. It generates an impressive mystical quality and
furnishes the elements of a vital and reasonable faith. The
finest devotional moods, including prayer and meditation, are
vitalized and refined. The meaning of God as the Common
Will and the Great Companion furnish conceptions of the
divine which are at once intimate and commanding.
