When, 50 years ago, Milne-Edward gave this principle to the development of the so-called physiological division of labor in animals, he recognized the parallelism between the economy of life and social economy; and from then on this parallelism became more and more clear. Few educated people now have some vague recognition of this truth; especially, stronger: divided labor, revealed by the industrial side of social the body became popular thanks to. political economists who took proper care of the resulting benefits.
However, the truth is not noticed at all, or very little is noticed, that this principle also remains valid for. the controlling part of society and its relations ‘ke’ druzima parts.
Even without facts explaining this truth, one can be convinced that we were in a hurry, with the ensuing
1) Basic soshyuolomi ch. ХХИ $448–453. Political integration and < 454-463 political. differentiation) as well as the ethics of societies. life. Justice ch. XXUI. where we find the following special formula relating to the same process: “The rise from the lowest level to the highest is marked by an increase in the heterogeneity of the structure and an increase in the subdivision of functions. In both cases, there is a mutual dependence of the parts, which becomes increasingly greater. significant increase in water level; and while this implied progressive limitation of one function to one part of the organism, there is also a progressive adaptation of such and such a part of such and such a function.” (emphasis added).
from it we limit, it normally manifests itself in. regulatory structures of societies, as in all others. Such specialization and such restrictions should bring advantages, and any change in the opposite direction leaves a regression.
The conclusion, therefore, is the same as before. Comprehensive state functions characterize the lower social type, and progress to the higher type is marked. We weaken the functions. 9.
It's clear that. Spencer is on the side of the limitations of state omnipotence and arrives at it inductively and deductively.
His political thesis is as follows *): “The duty of libethalism of the past was to limit the power of kings. The duty of true liberalism. in the future, to limit the power of parliamentarians.” It was inductive. It is shown that the duties of state power are only external and internal protection. The final duty is to take precedence in bringing the state closer to the industrial type. The weakening of the first duty entailed a weakening of the individual.
It can be shown deductively that the law of equal freedom (formulated above) does not allow the omnipotence of a military-type state. For. the state, interfering, in this case, in the life and activities of individuals will constantly violate the postulates of human justice, according to which “every individual (of adult age) experiences the burden or bad consequences of his own. own nature and the behavior that follows from this” (without interfering with others in the same) 3).
If this postulate is correct, then the state must adapt its activities to it. In accordance with this
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
2) umakaaa hundredths of women r. 185 St. U. 3) Ch. XXU, Justice r. p.
960 must assume only the following responsibilities. An individual on his own cannot fight external enemies and protect himself from internal attacks; this is where the state should help him, but not ‘bolfe’. Other duties characterized by the intervention of the state in individual life “whether by helping the individual or by directing his activity ‘or by curbing him”’). They are not justified either by considerations of justice or by political considerations ®).
The principle of justice is to require only one restriction on the freedom of an individual: restricting the equal freedom of other individuals. If a one-headed or many-headed (majority) government decides to decree the death of a child of age or deprive citizens. freedom of movement - it commits an encroachment on freedom.
If an indirect violation of freedom is committed, then no matter how it is covered up, it will still remain a violation. So, for example, “money taken from a citizen not with the purpose of paying for the cost of protecting his person from attack, but with the purpose of paying the cost of other duties, to which he did not give any consent, causes harm without warning him.”