Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-zzh7m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-29T18:16:08.854Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - Individualism vs. collectivism

from 6 - Ethics, politics, and legal theory

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 March 2008

By
Peter Nicholson
Edited by
Thomas Baldwin
Peter Nicholson
Affiliation:
University of York
Thomas Baldwin
Affiliation:
University of York
Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

In Britain, the period from 1870 to 1914 was one of a general movement, both in politics and in philosophical reflection on it, from individualism to collectivism (Collini 1979: ch. 1; Gaus 1983: ch. 1; Greenleaf 1983; Bellamy 1992: ch. 1). These are loose and disputed terms (M. Taylor 1996). Roughly, individualism meant leaving the individual as free as possible to pursue his own interests as he saw fit, society being simply a collection of individuals and a means to their ends. Collectivism was more or less the opposite, holding that individuals are not isolated atoms but social beings with shared interests, and that society may act through the state to promote them. Collectivism ranged in degree from occasional government action to effect particular social reforms, to state socialism’s control of the means of production and restructuring of society.

The dominant political theory, Liberalism, adapted itself to the new political conditions. Earlier in the nineteenth century, Liberalism had sought to maximise individual freedom and assumed that this entailed minimising state action. It restricted state action to what was unavoidable because all state action was by its very nature an interference with individual liberty and therefore intrinsically bad, and also bad in its effects, especially by reducing individuals' self-reliance. But later many Liberals accepted state action. They realised that for most individuals freedom from interference was worthless because they lacked the means to utilise it. State action could secure those means, and thus was not necessarily opposed to individual liberty.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge History of Philosophy 1870–1945 , pp. 289 - 296
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arnold, M. (1869). Culture & Anarchy: An Essay in Political and Social Criticism, London: Smith. New edn 1993, ed. Collini, S., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bellamy, R. (1992). Liberalism and Modern Society: An Historical Argument, Cambridge, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1885). Knowledge and Reality: A Criticism of Mr. F. H. Bradley’s ‘Principles of Logic’, London: Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1888). Logic, or the Morphology of Knowledge, 2 vols., Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2nd edn 1911.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1889). Essays and Addresses, London: Swan Sonnenschein.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1892). History of Aesthetic, London: Swan Sonnenschein, 2nd edn 1904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1893). The Civilization of Christendom and Other Studies, London: Swan Sonnenschein.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1895a). A Companion to Plato’s Republic for English Readers: Being a Commentary adapted to Davies and Vaughan’s Translation, London: Rivingtons.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1895b). The Essentials of Logic Being Ten Lectures On Judgement and Inference, London and New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1897). Psychology of the Moral Self, London and New York: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1899). The Philosophical Theory of the State, London: Macmillan, 4th edn 1923. New edn 2001, Gaus, G. F. and Sweet, W. (eds.), B. Bosanquet: The Philosophical Theory of the State and Related Essays, South Bend, IN: St Augustine’s Press.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1912). The Principle of Individuality and Value: The Gifford Lectures for 1911, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1913). The Value and Destiny of the Individual: The Gifford Lectures for 1912, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1915). Three Lectures on Aesthetic, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1917). Social and International Ideals: Being Studies in Patriotism, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1918). Some Suggestions in Ethics, London: Macmillan, 2nd edn 1919.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1920a). Implication and Linear Inference, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1920b). What Religion Is, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1921). The Meeting of Extremes in Contemporary Philosophy, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1927). Science and Philosophy and Other Essays, Muirhead, J. H. and Bosanquet, R.C. (eds.), London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1999a). The Collected Works of Bernard Bosanquet, vol. I: Selected Essays, Sweet, W. (ed.), Bristol: Thoemmes Press.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, B. (1999b). The Collected Works of Bernard Bosanquet, vol. XIV: Essays on ‘Aspects of the Social Problem’ and Essays on Social Policy, Sweet, W. (ed.), Bristol: Thoemmes Press.Google Scholar
Bosanquet, H. (1924). Bernard Bosanquet: A Short Account of his Life, London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Boucher, David and Vincent, Andrew (2000). British Idealism and Political Theory, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Bradley, F. H. (1876). Ethical Studies, London: King, 2nd edn 1927, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Cacoullos, A. C. (1974). Thomas Hill Green: Philosopher of Rights, New York: Twayne.Google Scholar
Carter, Matt (2003). T. H. Green and the Development of Ethical Socialism, Exeter: Imprint Academic.Google Scholar
Clarke, P. (1978). Liberals and Social Democrats, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collini, S. (1976). ‘Hobhouse, Bosanquet and the State: Philosophical Idealism and Political Argument in England 1880–1918’, Past and Present 72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collini, S. (1979). Liberalism and Sociology: L. T. Hobhouse and Political Argument in England 1880–1914, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dimova-Cookson, Maria (2001). T. H. Green’s Moral and Political Philosophy: A Phenomenological Perspective, Basingstoke: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeden, M. (1978). The New Liberalism: An Ideology of Social Reform, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Freeden, M. (1996). Ideologies and Political Theory: A Conceptual Approach, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Gaus, G. F. (1983). The Modern Liberal Theory of Man, London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Gaus, G. F. (1994). ‘Green, Bosanquet and the Philosophy of Coherence’ in Ten, C. L. (ed.), The Routledge History of Philosophy, vol. VII: The Nineteenth Century, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Green, T. H. (1881). Liberal Legislation and Freedom of Contract: A Lecture, Oxford: Slatter and Rose. New edn 1986, Harris, P. and Morrow, J. (eds.), T. H.Green: Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation and Other Writings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Green, T. H. (1885–8). Works of Thomas Hill Green, 3 vols., ed. Nettleship, R. L., London: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar
Green, T. H. (1886). Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation, in Nettleship, R. L. (ed.), Works of Thomas Hill Green, vol. II: Philosophical Works, London: Longmans, Green. New edn 1986, Harris, P. and Morrow, J. (eds), T. H. Green: Lectures on the Principles of Political Obligation and Other Writings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Green, T. H. (1997). Additional Writings, ed. Nicholson, P. P., Bristol: Thoemmes Press.Google Scholar
Green, T.H. (1883). Prolegomena to Ethics by the Late Thomas Hill Green, ed. Bradley, A. C., Oxford: Clarendon Press. New edn 2003, Brink, D. (ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greengarten, I. M. (1981). Thomas Hill Green and the Development of Liberal-Democratic Thought, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Greenleaf, W. H. (1983). The British Political Tradition, 2 vols., London and New York: Methuen.Google Scholar
Harris, F. P. (1944). The Neo-Idealist Political Theory: Its Continuity with the British Tradition, New York: King’s Crown Press.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1896). The Theory of Knowledge: A Contribution to Some Problems of Logic and Metaphysics, London: Methuen, 3rd edn 1921.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1901). Mind in Evolution, London: Macmillan, 3rd edn 1926.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1904). Democracy and Reaction, London: Fisher Unwin, 2nd edn 1909.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1906). Morals in Evolution: A Study in Comparative Ethics, 2 vols., London: Chapman and Hall, 3rd edn 1913.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1911a). Liberalism, London: Williams and Norgate. New edn 1994, Meadowcroft, J. (ed.), L. T. Hobhouse: Liberalism and Other Writings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1911b). Social Evolution and Political Theory, New York: Columbia University Press. Ch. IX reprinted 1994 in Meadowcroft, J. (ed.), L. T. Hobhouse: Liberalism and Other Writings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1913a). Development and Purpose: An Essay Towards a Philosophy of Evolution, London: Macmillan, 2nd edn 1929.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1913b). ‘The Historical Evolution of Property, in Fact and Idea’ in Gore, C. (ed.), Property, Its Duties and Rights: Historically, Philosophically and Religiously Regarded, London and New York: Macmillan. Repr. 1994 in Meadowcroft, J. (ed.), L. T. Hobhouse: Liberalism and Other Writings, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1918). The Metaphysical Theory of the State: A Criticism, London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1921). The Rational Good: A Study in the Logic of Practice, London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1922). The Elements of Social Justice, London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Hobhouse, L. T. (1924). Social Development: Its Nature and Conditions, London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Hobson, J. A. & Ginsberg, M. (1931). L. T. Hobhouse: His Life and Work, London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Houang, F. (1954). Le néo-hégélianisme en Angleterre: la philosophie de Bernard Bosanquet, Paris: Vrin.Google Scholar
Hurka, T. (1993). Perfectionism, New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kloppenberg, J. T. (1986). Uncertain Victory: Social Democracy and Progressivism in European and American Thought, 1870–1920, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Latta, R. (1905). ‘Memoir’ in Latta, R. (ed.), Philosophical Studies by David George Ritchie, London and New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lewis, H. D. (1962). Freedom and History, London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Meadowcroft, J. (1995). Conceptualizing the State: Innovation and Dispute in British Political Thought 1880–1914, Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mill, J. S. (1848). Principles of Political Economy with Some of Their Applications to Social Philosophy, London: Parker. New edn 1965, Robson, J. M. (ed.), Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, vols. II–III, Toronto: University of Toronto Press and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. (1859). On Liberty, London: Parker. New edition 1977, ed. Robson, J. M., Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, vol. XVIII: Essays on Politics and Society, Toronto: University of Toronto Press and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. (1873). Autobiography, London: Longmans, Green. New edn 1981, Robson, J. M. (ed.), Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, vol. I, Toronto: University of Toronto Press and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Milne, A. J. M. (1962). The Social Philosophy of English idealism, London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Muirhead, J. H. (1908). The Service of the State: Four Lectures on the Political Teaching of T. H. Green, London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Muirhead, J. H. (ed.) (1935). Bernard Bosanquet and His Friends: Letters Illustrating the Sources and the Development of His Philosophical Opinions, London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Nettleship, R. L. (1888). ‘Memoir’ in Nettleship, R. L. (ed.), Works of Thomas Hill Green, vol. III, Miscellanies and Memoir, London: Longmans, Green.Google Scholar
Nicholson, P. P. (1990). The Political Philosophy of the British Idealists: Selected Studies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Otter, S. den (1996). British Idealism and Social Explanation: A Study in Late Victorian Thought, Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plamenatz, J. P. (1938). Consent, Freedom and Political Obligation, London: Oxford University Press, 2nd edn 1968.Google Scholar
Prichard, H. A. (1968). Moral Obligation and Duty and Interest: Essays and Lectures, London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pucelle, J. (1960–5). La nature et l'esprit dans la philosophie de T. H. Green: La Renaissance de l'Idéalisme en Angleterre au XIXe siècle, 2 vols., Paris: Beatrice Nauwelaerts.Google Scholar
Randall, J. H. Jr. (1966). ‘Idealistic Social Philosophy and Bernard Bosanquet’, Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 24 Repr. 1977 in Randall, (ed. Singer, B. J.), Philosophy After Darwin: Chapters for the Career of Philosophy, vol. III, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Richter, M. (1964). The Politics of Conscience: T. H. Green and His Age, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.Google Scholar
Ritchie, D. G. (1889). Darwinism and Politics, London: Swan Sonnenschein, 4th edn 1901.Google Scholar
Ritchie, D. G. (1891). The Principles of State Interference: Four Essays on the Political Philosophy of Mr. Herbert Spencer, J. S. Mill, and T. H. Green, London: Swan Sonnenschein, 4th edn 1902.Google Scholar
Ritchie, D. G. (1893). Darwin and Hegel with Other Philosophical Studies, London: Swan Sonnenschein.Google Scholar
Ritchie, D. G. (1894). Natural Rights: A Criticism of Some Political and Ethical Conceptions, London: Swan Sonnenschein and New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ritchie, D. G. (1902). Studies in Political and Social Ethics, London: Swan Sonnenschein and New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ritchie, D. G. (1905). Philosophical Studies, (ed.) Latta, R., London and New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ritchie, D. G. (1998). Collected Works of D. G. Ritchie, vol. VI: Miscellaneous Writings, ed. Nicholson, P. P., Bristol: Thoemmes Press.Google Scholar
Sidgwick, H. (1902). Lectures on the Ethics of T. H. Green, Mr. Herbert Spencer, and J. Martineau, (ed.) Jones, E. E. C., London and New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Simhony, Avital and Weinstein, David (eds.) (2001). The New Liberalism: Reconciling Liberty and Community, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skorupski, J. (1993). English-Language Philosophy 1750–1945, Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Spencer, H. (1884). Man versus the State, London: Williams and Norgate.Google Scholar
Sweet, W. (1997). Idealism and Rights: The Social Ontology of Human Rights in the Political Thought of Bernard Bosanquet, Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Sweet, W. (1998). ‘Bernard Bosanquet’ in Zalta, E. N. (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy, Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Taylor, M. W. (1992). Men versus the State: Herbert Spencer and Late Victorian Individualism, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, M. (ed.) (1996). Herbert Spencer and the Limits of the State: The Late Nineteenth-century Debate between Individualism and Collectivism, Bristol: Thoemmes Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, G. (1987). The Moral Philosophy of T. H. Green, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Tyler, C. (1998). Thomas Hill Green and the Philosophical Foundations of Politics: An Internal Critique, Lewiston and Lampeter: Edwin Mellen Press.Google Scholar
Vincent, A. and Plant, R. (1984). Philosophy, Politics and Citizenship: The Life and Thought of the British Idealists, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Vincent, A. (ed.) (1986). The Philosophy of T. H. Green, Aldershot: Gower.Google Scholar
Wempe, B. (1986). Beyond Equality: A Study of T. H. Green’s Theory of Positive Freedom, Delft: Eburon.Google Scholar
Wolfe, W. (1975). From Radicalism to Socialism: Men and Ideas in the Formation of Fabian Socialist Doctrines, 1881–1889, New Haven, CT and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×