Purchase of this book includes free trial access to www.million-books.com where you can read more than a million books for free. This is an OCR edition with typos. Excerpt from book: H. INFLUENCE OF ENVIRONMENT UPON HUMAN TYPES After having seen that the high estimate of our civilization does not necessarily imply that the carriers of this civilization have an anatomical organization superior to that of all other races, we may turn our attention to a closer investigation of the characteristics of different divisions of mankind. It is clear that our investigations cannot be based on vague descriptions of travellers, ? who remark upon the enormous digestive organs of primitive man, or on his small size, or on the lack of development of his limbs, or even upon his resemblance to apes,? but on serious studies of anatomical characteristics. Two problems may be distinguished here which have too often been confounded in discussions of the mental characteristics of civilized man and of primitive man. / The one relates to the distinctions between races; the other, to distinctions between the social strata of the same race. According to the meaning of the terms "civilized " and "primitive," it is perfectly conceivable that there may be civilized groups belonging to different races (like the Chinese and Europeans), and civilized as well as primitive groups, both belonging to the same race (like the Yukaghir of Siberia and the Chinese, or like the group of educated negroes in the United States and the primitive tribes of the coasts of Africa). The problems presented by the differences between the various races of man, and by the differences between social groups in the same races, are, of course, entirely distinct, and each requires separate treatment./ There is one peculiarity common to both problems, which must be described before we can properly take up their treatment. When we compare the individuals comprising any one racial or social t...

There are outstanding studies of nationalism as a history of nationalistic ideas, as in the writings of Hans Kohn; there are competent descriptions of nationalism as a force in politics, as by the Study Group of the Royal Institute of International Affairs headed by Edward Hallett Carr; and there are important works organizing the many facts about nationalism in terms of some particular problem, such as Quincy Wright's monumental Study of War. But there has seemed to be no answer to the question why nationalist ideas met with wide and strong response at certain times and places, and with almost no response at others.
In certain areas, economic growth has led to national unification; in others to greater national diversity. Why did national sentiments develop in one direction but not in the other? In certain cases, individuals can and do change from membership in one people to membership in another; in other situations they seem almost powerless to do so, and nationality appears as if it were some objective fact beyond the decisions of individuals.
What, then, is ethnic nationality? Under which conditions will a government or a political organization find it an asset? Under which a liability? What is the relation of this nationalisty to economic life, to incomes, opportunities, and expectations? And how may it become so important to individuals as to override their economic interest and even their interest in self-preservation?
To make a beginning at answering these questions we need studies about objective as well as the subjective sides of nationalisty, and about the long-run trends of national assimilation or differentiation.
The present study represents an attempt toward such a theory.