If we omit the higher but disputed topics of morals and religion, we
shall find, I think, that the plainer {128} and agreed-on superiorities
of the Englishmen are these: first, that they have a greater command
over the powers of nature upon the whole. Though they may fall short
of individual Australians in certain feats of petty skill, though they
may not throw the boomerang as well, or light a fire with earthsticks
as well, yet on the whole twenty Englishmen with their implements and
skill can change the material world immeasurably more than twenty
Australians and their machines. Secondly, that this power is not
external only; it is also internal. The English not only possess
better machines for moving nature, but are themselves better machines.
Mr. Babbage taught us years ago that one great use of machinery was not
to augment the force of man, but to register and regulate the power of
man; and this in a thousand ways civilized man can do, and is ready to
do, better and more precisely than the barbarian. Thirdly, civilized
man has not only greater powers over nature, but knows better how to
use them, and by better I here mean better for the health and comfort
of his present body and mind. He can lay up for old age, which a
savage having no durable means of sustenance cannot; he is ready to lay
up because he can distinctly foresee the future, which the vague-minded
savage cannot.[2]
It will be observed that in each case the superiority of the Englishmen
lies in the fact that they _beat the Australians at their own game_.
Australians are as much interested as Englishmen in obtaining command
over nature, in organizing their own powers, and in securing health and
comfort. The Englishmen, however, can fulfil these interests not only
up to but also beyond {129} the point which marks the limit of the
Australians' attainment.
The method of superimposition is virtually employed in all competitive
struggle. The glory and fruits of victory are sought by both
opponents, and the success of one is the failure of the other. The
superiority of the victor to the vanquished is beyond question only
because they had the same interest at stake.
The application of this method to the determination of progress is not
confined to philosophers of history. It is applied by every individual
who realizes that his advance from childhood to maturity has been
attended with growth and development. For the old boundaries of
childho
|