usly increases as the group is hard pressed
in its conflicts, competitions, and rivalries.
These crises and conflicts of a competing group present problems which
must be solved--problems of organization, of inventions of many kinds,
of new ideas and philosophies, of methods of adjustment. The conditions
of competition or rivalry upset an equilibrium of habit and custom, and
a process of problem-solving ensues. A typhoid epidemic forces the
village to protect itself against the competition of a more healthful
rival. The resourceful labor union facing a corporation which offers
profit-sharing and retiring allowances must formulate a protective
theory and practice. A society clique too closely imitated by a lower
stratum must regain its distinction and supremacy. A nation must be
constantly alert to adjust itself to the changing conditions of
international trade and to the war equipment and training of its
rivals.
The theory of group rivalry throws light upon the individual. The person
has as many selves as there are groups to which he belongs. He is simple
or complex as his groups are few and harmonious or many and conflicting.
What skilful management is required to keep business and moral selves
from looking each other in the eye, to prevent scientific and
theological selves from falling into discussion! Most men of many groups
learn, like tactful hosts, to invite at a given time only congenial
companies of selves. A few brave souls resolve to set their house in
order and to entertain only such selves as can live together with good
will and mutual respect. With these earnest folk their groups have to
reckon. The conflicts of conscience are group conflicts.
Tolerance is a sign that once vital issues within the group are losing
their significance, or that the group feels secure, or that it is
slowly, even unconsciously, merging into a wider grouping. Theological
liberality affords a case in point. In the earlier days of sectarian
struggle tolerance was a danger both to group loyalty and to the
militant spirit. Cynicism for other reasons is also a menace. It means
loss of faith in the collective ego, in the traditions, shibboleths,
symbols, and destiny of the group. Fighting groups cannot be tolerant;
nor can they harbor cynics. Tolerance and cynicism are at once causes
and results of group decay. They portend dissolution or they foreshadow
new groupings for struggle over other issues on another plane.
Evangelical chu
|