We need no longer hold our tongues or fear to vote the revolutionary or reformatory ticket. Our stocks might fall， our hopes of promotion vanish， our salaries stop， our club doors close in our faces； yet， (254) while we lived， we would imperturbably bear witness to the spirit， and our example would help to set free our generation." [2]
If these considerations do not keep us from greed， it is because most of us have only flashes of tile higher ambition. We may believe that we could reconcile ourselves to poverty if we had to梕ven that it might be good for us梑ut we do our best to avoid it.
For the ill-paid classes， certainly， the desire for money does not mean "materialism" in any reproachful sense， but is chiefly the means by which they hope to realize， first， health and decency， and then a better chance at the higher life梑ooks， leisure， education and refinement. They are necessarily materialized in a certain sense by the fact that their most strenuous thought must be fixed upon work and product in relation to material needs. It is in those who are already well-to-do that the preoccupation with money is most degrading梐s not justified by primary wants. "Meat is sweetest when it is nearest the bone，" and it is good to long and strive for money when you have an urgent human need for it； but to do this for accumulation， luxury， or a remote security is not wholesome. This cold-blooded storing up in banks and tin boxes is perilous to the soul， often becoming a kind of secret vice， a disease of narrow minds， feeble imaginations and contracted living [3]
In modern life， then， and in a country without formal privilege， the question of classes is practically one of wealth， and of occupation considered in relation to wealth；(255) the reason being not that this distinction really dominates life， but that it is the focus of the more definite and urgent class controversies.
Other aims are pursued in peace； wealth， because it is material and appropriable， involves conflict. We may then accept the economic standpoint for this purpose without at all agreeing with those who regard it as more fundamental than others . [4]
Endnotes Walden， 89， 91. The Varieties of Religious Experience， 368. I will not here discuss the question just how far it serves a useful purpose in the economic system. If the reader cares to know my opinion of that doctrine梥ometimes called the economic interpretation of history梬hich teaches that economic conditions are in a peculiar sense the primary and determining factor in society， he will find it in the following passages：
" The organic view of history [which I hold] denies that any factor or factors are more ultimate than others. Indeed it denies that the so-called factors梥uch as the mind， the various institutions the physical environment and so on梙ave any real existence apart from a total life in which all share in the same way that the members of the body share in the life of the animal organism. It looks upon mind and matter， soil， climate， flora， fauna， thought， language and institutions as aspects of a single rounded whole， one total growth. We may concentrate attention upon some one of these things， but this concentration should never go so far as to overlook the subordination of each to the whole， or to eoneeive one as precedent to others."" I cannot see that the getting of food， or whatever else the economic activities may be defined to be， is any more the logical basis of existence than the ideal activities. It is true that there could be no ideas and institutions without a food supply， but no more could we get food if we did not have ideas and institutions. All work together， and each of the principal functions is essential to every other. ""History is not like a tangled skein which you may straighten out by getting hold of the right end and following it with sufficient persistence.
It has no straightness， no merely lineal continuity， in its nature. It is a living thing， to be known by sharing its life， very much as you know a person. In the organic world梩hat is to say in real life梕ach function is a centre from which causes radiate and to which they converge； all is alike cause and effect； there is no logical primacy， no independent variable， no place where the thread begins As in the fable of the belly and the members each is dependent upon all the others. You must see the whole or you do not truly see anything." (Publications of the American Economic Association， Third Series， vol. v， 426 #.)
