Jane Addams’s Evolutionary Theorizing

Jane Addams’s Evolutionary Theorizing

Constructing “Democracy and Social Ethics”

Marilyn Fischer

The University of Chicago Press

CHICAGO LONDON

Open access edition funded by the National Endowment for the Humanities.

This work is being made available under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). To view a copy of this license, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

The University of Chicago Press, Chicago 60637

The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., London

© 2019 by The University of Chicago

Published 2019

Printed in the United States of America

28 27 26 25 24 23 22 21 20 19    1 2 3 4 5

ISBN-13: 978-0-226-63132-5 (cloth)

ISBN-13: 978-0-226-63146-2 (e-book)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226631462.001.0001

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Names: Fischer, Marilyn, author.

Title: Jane Addams’s evolutionary theorizing : constructing “Democracy and social ethics” / Marilyn Fischer.

Description: Chicago ; London : The University of Chicago Press, 2019. | Includes bibliographical references and index.

Identifiers: LCCN 2018046935 | ISBN 9780226631325 (cloth : alk. paper) | ISBN 9780226631462 (e-book)

Subjects: LCSH: Addams, Jane, 1860–1935. | Addams, Jane, 1860–1935. Democracy and social ethics. | Social evolution. | Evolution—Moral and ethical aspects. | Democracy. | Social ethics. | Pragmatism.

Classification: LCC HV28.A35 F56 2019 | DDC 303.3/720973—dc23

LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018046935

This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanence of Paper).

To Dr. Jane S. Zembaty and Dr. Patricia A. Johnson

for preparing the way

Words are hoops

Through which to leap upon meanings,

Which are horses’ backs,

Bare, moving.

Witter Bynner, “Horses,” 1919

Contents

List of Illustrations

Introduction

1  An Evolving Democracy

2  An Evolutionary Method of Ethical Deliberation

3  From Feudalism to Association

4  The City’s Moral Geology

5  Educating Immigrants

6  Science and the Social Settlement

7  Constructing Democracy and Social Ethics

Acknowledgments

Notes

Bibliography

Index

Illustrations

1  Jane Addams, scientist, 1940

2  Mass meeting at Hull House, 1895

3  United States troops sent to Chicago, 1894

4  He Won’t Be Reformed, 1898

5  Hull House, Pond & Pond, Architects, 1900

6  Free lectures on organic evolution, 1897

7  Jane Addams in NCR Women’s Dining Room, May 1898

Introduction

This is the story of how Jane Addams (1860–1935) used social evolutionary theorizing to develop a method of ethical deliberation, useful for addressing the most troubling social problems of her era. She presented this method in her first book, Democracy and Social Ethics, published in 1902. This book is considered her most philosophical and is the one most beloved after Twenty Years at Hull-House.[1] Scholars use it to confirm and deepen their understanding of Addams as a progressive social reformer, a classical American pragmatist, and an advocate for democratic citizenship. Few associate Addams with theories of social evolution. In Democracy and Social Ethics Addams’s graceful writing and compelling vignettes both carry and conceal evidence of social evolutionary thinking that lies just below the text’s surface. They also conceal the extraordinary creativity with which she developed her method through successive iterations of its use.

This book will demonstrate that the key to reconstructing Addams’s argument in Democracy and Social Ethics is to locate it among the social evolutionary theories prominent in the late nineteenth century. I have drawn from philosophy, history, literature, rhetoric, and more to create a hybrid methodology suited for bringing this evidence to light. My method is in part archeological, as I excavate Addams’s texts to identify her intellectual resources and place them on the conceptual map of social evolutionary theorizing. My method is also architectural, as I use this material to reconstruct Addams’s argument in the text.

My reading of the text may startle those already acquainted her work. I have tried to come as close as possible for someone in the twenty-first century to uncover how educated readers of her day would have understood the patterns of reasoning Addams employed.

For some years I examined Addams’s writings in the usual way that philosophers do: pull out the arguments from a text, evaluate them, compare them with those of other philosophers, use them to think about contemporary concerns. Like many of my colleagues, I was pleased to explore texts of a woman intellectual from the past whose gracious, vigorous prose spoke directly to issues of our day. The more I studied Addams’s writings, though, the more mysterious they became. Addressing educated lay audiences, Addams could allude briefly to then-current controversies and now forgotten theorists with a mere flick of a verbal wrist. As I read her analyses of family relations, social unrest, and war, odd turns of phrase I had formerly regarded as background noise began to trouble me. Why, in an 1895 passage on unionizing sweatshop workers, did Addams call isolation a “social crime” that leads to “extermination”? Why did she write in 1907 that the crowded, immigrant sections of the city “exhibit such an undoubted tendency to barbarism and degeneracy”? Why in 1915, when addressing an international gathering of women at The Hague, did Addams urge her audience to attend to “deep-set racial impulses” and “primitive human urgings”? Why did she use convoluted syntax, writing for example, that Democracy and Social Ethics is about people “who are being impelled by the newer conception of democracy”?[2] Why didn’t she simply say that people are attracted to it? The more I read, the more these verbal peculiarities insisted I give them attention. Intuitively, I was following Thomas Kuhn’s advice to start with the peculiar verbal hiccups that don’t seem to fit and seek an interpretation in which they make sense.[3]

I began by identifying sources for the many unattributed quotations Addams included in essays written in the 1890s and revised as chapters for Democracy and Social Ethics. I sniffed out passages in her texts that I suspected contained paraphrased (and sometimes quoted) material for which Addams gave no markers. I kept a phrase file of terms Addams and her contemporaries used with some frequency. A small subset of these terms includes adjustment, association, claim, dynamic, fellowship, instincts, intelligence, motive, perplexity, primitive, reconstruction, scientific, and sympathy. Archive.org, Hathitrust.org, and the JSTOR database were my constant companions as I searched through late nineteenth-century writings to decode the language with which Addams and her contemporaries exchanged ideas. How participants framed the debates and the kinds of reasons they considered most salient were more important for my purposes than their conclusions.

William James gives the clue to understanding these keywords and the debates in which they functioned. He writes, “Every definite image in the mind is steeped and dyed in the free water that flows round it. . . . The significance, the value, of the image is all in this halo or penumbra that surrounds and escorts it.”[4] Much of the meaning of the era’s key terms resided in their penumbras of associations. These carried considerable evolutionary content that the terms no longer carry today. To follow Addams’s reasoning, these key terms must be translated in a sense, set within the penumbras of associations as understood in Addams’s time. Thomas Kuhn is right about what happens when one finds a conceptual map on which a writer’s verbal oddities are located: “When these passages make sense, then you may find that the more central passages, ones you previously thought you understood, have changed their meaning.”[5] Placed on the conceptual map of social evolutionary theorizing, Addams’s conceptions of democracy and social ethics take on deeper meanings, while being transformed in sometimes jarring ways.

This book benefits from recent scholarship on Addams. While Addams has long been recognized as a social reform activist, recent scholars have focused on her intellectual contributions. Biographer Louise W. Knight traces Addams’s path from her father’s moral absolutism to her own, experience-tested pragmatist ethic. Historian Victoria Bissell Brown pays particular attention to how Addams honed her intellectual powers through religious questioning. Literary scholar Katherine Joslin chronicles Addams’s life as a writer.[6] Scholars in history, literature, rhetoric, religious studies, sociology, social work, political science, feminist and gender studies, and peace studies find in her writings valuable patterns for their own explorations. For example, scholars have found helpful models for public administration and urban planning in Addams’s texts, as well as prototypes for new methodologies of social science research.[7] Contemporary political theorists have adapted Addams’s ideas in their discussions of communitarianism, cosmopolitanism, democratic citizenship, and democratic rhetoric.[8] Addams’s ideas appear in contemporary feminist theorizing on ethics, aesthetics, and the environment.[9]

A number of scholars have focused specifically on the method of ethical deliberation Addams employs in Democracy and Social Ethics. Approaching the text with different lenses, they have illuminated Addams’s fundamental ethical orientation. Louise W. Knight writes that Addams, “believing deeply in the ideals of cooperation and democracy, . . . turned them into a way of life.”[10] Knight traces Addams’s fascination with the cooperative movement that countered the individualism lying at the heart of classical economic and political liberalism. Cooperators designed workplaces and communities in which ownership, governance, and the benefits and burdens of social life were shared equitably and cooperatively. With her fellow Hull House residents and neighbors, Addams experimented with a coal cooperative, a cooperative kitchen, and a cooperative residence for young working women. Knight writes that Addams carried the spirit of cooperation into her understanding of democracy, asking citizens to form relationships with people of every social class and to give special credence to those at society’s lower margin because of their intimate knowledge of abject social conditions.[11]

Philosopher Maurice Hamington reads Democracy and Social Ethics through the lens of feminist literature on the ethics of care. Care ethics centers attention on the relations among people and on the caregiving required to sustain them. Hamington writes that Addams extends care ethics into the social and political arena, asking people to cultivate what he calls “social habits of care.” For Addams, he writes, democracy names the setting in which institutions, policies, and cultural habits are formed and sustained through attending to the community’s health and well-being.[12]

In her introduction to the University of Illinois Press reprint edition of Democracy and Social Ethics, philosopher Charlene Haddock Seigfried characterizes Addams’s method as “autobiographical, contextual, pluralistic, narrational, experimentally fallibilist, and embedded in history and specific social movements.”[13] Seigfried confirms Addams’s standing as one of the early classical American pragmatists by showing how closely her methodology resonates with theirs. Both emphasize process, context, growth, experience as interaction between organism and environment, and theory as arising from and tested in lived experience. Seigfried highlights how for Addams ethical growth depends upon responding to the moral perplexities of daily life with all of one’s capacities, affective and relational as well as rational. Democratic relations are ones of reciprocity as people work through these perplexities together.[14]

Knight, Hamington, and Seigfried demonstrate how markedly Addams’s conceptions of ethics and democracy differ from more traditional ones. Her relational ethics contrasts with theories based on abstract universal principles such as Kant’s rational deontology, a utilitarian calculus, or a theory of virtues to be inculcated into one’s character. For Addams, acting ethically is not a matter of taking abstract principles and “applying” them in daily life. These scholars also contrast Addams’s conception of democracy with the usual assumption that democracy is a form of governmental machinery. Addams begins with persons in relation rather than with autonomous individuals who enter into a social contract aimed at preserving their own autonomy of thought and action.

To account for Addams’s pragmatism, contemporary scholars rightly stress how Addams’s activism informed her theorizing. Her activism, they write, brought her to understand the individual self as deeply social and relational. It also brought her to attend far more closely to issues of gender and social class than her pragmatist male counterparts did.[15] Addams’s capacity for reflection on her experiences was formidable. Knight observes that Addams “studied those experiences not for an hour or an afternoon but for weeks and months and years. . . . It was this persistent rethinking, and not only the experiences, that produced her profoundest insights.”[16] Seigfried ties Addams’s activism and reflection into a “pragmatist-hermeneutic circle.” In this never-ending cycle, reflections on experience are tested by further experiences.[17]

However, the picture that emerges is of Addams deriving her pragmatist vision primarily by reflecting on her experiences, supplemented by reading and conversations with a relatively restricted number of authors and social reformers.[18] This gives a truncated account of the reach of Addams’s intellectual engagement. Philosophers and historians of pragmatism have discussed at length how Peirce, James, and Dewey developed their ideas through engaging with evolutionary thought.[19] This step has not been undertaken for Addams. This book fills this gap by documenting the vast array of evolutionary concepts, images, and ideas Addams used to filter, reflect on, and reframe her experiences. Had she documented her writings scrupulously, her list of references would have included a large number of international intellectuals engaged in scientific research. Addams knew many of the authors personally; her correspondence with some of them spanned decades. This book tells how Addams shaped these resources to develop the method of ethical deliberation she used to such stunning effect in Democracy and Social Ethics. It also documents how, in revising earlier essays for the book, Addams masked much of their evolutionary content.

Addams did not advance her own theory of evolution but adapted various evolutionary theories proposed by others in developing her own ideas. For Addams and her contemporaries, the meaning of “evolution” was far more diffuse than it is today. The penumbras of associations and core meanings of “evolution” and “Darwinian” have shifted considerably since the late nineteenth century. Darwinian evolution is now widely understood in terms of natural selection, resulting from random variations in genetic material. While most biologists in the late nineteenth century called themselves Darwinians, the range of evolutionary theories they proposed were generally directional and progressive.[20] American biologist Vernon Kellogg noted in 1907 that his fellow biologists did not doubt the truth of evolution but had little use for natural selection. He writes, “The fair truth is that the Darwinian selection theories, considered with regard to their claimed capacity to be an independently sufficient mechanical explanation of descent, stand today seriously discredited in the biological world.” After pointing out weaknesses in alternative explanations, Kellogg admits, “We are immensely unsettled.”[21]

Genetics emerged as a separate science beginning in 1900; Gregor Mendel’s mid-nineteenth-century experiments with pea plants lay forgotten in his monastery. Early geneticists focused on how traits were transmitted from organisms to their immediate offspring. It was not until the 1930s that genetics merged with Darwin’s notion of natural selection, rendering the term “evolution” more precise.[22]

Late nineteenth-century social scientists were largely evolutionists and agreed that evolution was orderly and progressive. Their domain was the evolutionary history of the human race; they accepted but rarely debated how the human species emerged from its animal ancestors.[23] “Evolution” was less a term with specific content than a lens for understanding history, be it the history of species, cultures, ideas, morality, economics, law, or religion. To accommodate modern sensibilities one could substitute “historicist” for “evolutionary.” However, doing so risks losing the penumbra of associations that Addams and her late nineteenth-century peers regarded as integral to the terms “evolution” and “evolutionary.”

The Discourse of Social Evolutionary Theorizing

Mention social evolutionary theorizing today, and many readers hold their noses. Their minds move quickly to the social Darwinism of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, based on particularly bloody readings of the “struggle for existence” and “survival of the fittest.” They associate social Darwinism with using evolution ideologically to justify aggressive, unrestricted laissez-faire capitalism, racial oppression, imperialism, and war.[24] It is true that some theorists of Addams’s era used social evolutionary theories to justify these things. However, these theorists represent only a fraction of those who thought about humans and society in evolutionary terms.[25]

By the late nineteenth century, evolutionary assumptions and patterns of thought pervaded intellectual discourse. Participants in this discourse community shared texts, ideas, and ways of perceiving the world. Within the discourse, questions, themes, and vocabulary were shaped in highly malleable ways.[26] Under the umbrella of “evolution” theorists on all sides carried out their debates regarding war and peace, male and female social roles, economic and governmental systems, racial distinctions, territorial expansion, religion, and ethical criteria for right and wrong.[27] Addams carried out her own theorizing within this discourse, deftly exploiting its materials’ malleability.

With the theory of evolution, scientists became historians. Enlightenment notions of uniform, deterministic scientific laws and eternal, self-evident truths shrank into artifacts of a particular historical era, now past. Darwin makes the point, remarking, “All true classification [is] genealogical.”[28] To understand how organisms are related to each other, Darwin looked for the “hidden bond” among organisms that places them into “communit[ies] of descent.”[29] Theorists regarded habitats, both biological and social, as always in process, always undergoing dynamic change. The organisms populating the habitat adapted in response to the environment as they evolved through minute variations.

Just how these communities of descent evolved was a matter of intense debate. Early in the nineteenth century Jean-Baptiste Lamarck hypothesized that organisms could adapt to environmental changes by developing habitual patterns of behavior; these habits could evolve into instincts and be inherited by offspring. By midcentury, Herbert Spencer had identified evolution’s temporal direction, with organisms evolving from simple to complex, from homogeneity to heterogeneity. In 1859 Charles Darwin proposed natural selection as the conduit for evolutionary change, although he admitted he didn’t know how it worked.[30] Biologists sought to identify patterns of growth and decay that would reveal the laws of evolutionary change. Some, such as Herbert Spencer, John Fiske, and William Graham Sumner, thought these patterns were deterministic. Darwin considered natural selection to be a matter of probability; geologist and philosopher Charles S. Peirce and William James, who donned the hats of physiologist, psychologist, and philosopher, agreed.[31] Psychologist and architect Henry Rutgers Marshall reminded his readers that nature’s laws are merely descriptive. Organisms, including humans, are subject to these laws, not, he writes, as “slaves to laws extrinsic to us, but rather that we, being part and parcel of Nature, exemplify her characteristics.”[32]

Throughout the nineteenth century, biologists’ work on evolution catalyzed imaginations and reshaped the logic of every field, including philosophy, theology, and the arts.[33] British legal scholar and jurist Frederick Pollock wrote in 1890, “The doctrine of evolution is nothing else than the historical method applied to the facts of nature; the historical method is nothing else than the doctrine of evolution applied to human societies and institutions.”[34] Disciplinary lines were thin and wavering, as evolution from the earliest amoebas to the most sophisticated manifestations of civilization was considered a continuous process. When geologists, for example, drew sociological and theological conclusions, no one accused them of stepping outside their realm of expertise.[35]

As the social sciences emerged as distinct disciplines in the latter half of the nineteenth century, they too were pervaded by evolutionary reasoning. Social scientists defined their disciplines historically and understood their task in terms of tracing beliefs and social practices from their historical origins up to the present.[36] Nearly all late nineteenth-century scientists equated evolution’s movement toward increasing complexity with progress.[37] Geologist Joseph Le Conte was explicit: “Evolution may be defined as continuous progressive change, according to certain laws and by means of resident forces, i.e., by natural forces residing in the thing evolving.” He gives the name “social evolution” to evolutionary progress in Homo sapiens.[38] Irish sociologist Benjamin Kidd waxed poetic, writing, “The whole plan of life is, in short, being slowly revealed to us in a new light, and we are beginning to perceive that it presents a single majestic unity, throughout every part of which the conditions of law and orderly progress reign supreme.”[39]

As theorists tried to make sense of empirical observations, they drew on all the theoretical materials they had at hand. They adapted ideas from pre-Darwinian development theorists such as Hegel and Comte, stirred in some idealism and romanticism, and funneled it all through biological evolution.[40] Preevolutionary writers lent inspiration, but later scholars were aware of their deficiencies. English essayist Walter Pater, from whose writings Addams culled many felicitous quotations, shaded his appreciation of Coleridge with nostalgia. Coleridge charmed him, even though the poet had clung to “those older methods of philosophic inquiry, over which the empirical philosophy of our day has triumphed.”[41] Some of Addams’s British friends took on the work of updating these preevolutionary ideas: Frederic Harrison updated Comte, Sidney and Beatrice Webb did the same for pre-Darwinian socialists, and John Morley worked out an evolutionary reading of J. S. Mill.[42] With her contemporaries, Addams took seriously the analogy between the biological organism and the social organism, in which the health of each part of the organism is a function of their mutual interdependence. She thought of all humanity in relational terms, not as a collection of discrete individuals but as conjoined by affiliative bonds of affection and responsibility.

There are good reasons why Addams’s use of social evolutionary theorizing has not yet been studied. Serious consideration of Addams as an intellectual and theorist is relatively recent. Addams did not enter biologists’ debates on how natural selection took place, and she often crafted stories to dress her use of evolutionary patterns of thought. Today’s readers are apt to interpret Addams’s historical references as examples or background material rather than seeing them as constituting evolutionary arguments. Also, the evolutionary method employed a now discredited historiography of Eurocentric grand narratives that moved nimbly from humans’ earliest social groupings to the present. The theorists Addams found useful are rarely read today and, if read, are scorned as lacking rigor.

Most scholars ignore Addams’s occasional references to evolutionary thought or pass them off as instances of outdated vocabulary.[43] One exception is political theorist Bob Pepperman Taylor. His discussion of the evolutionary content in Addams’s writings illustrates how disquieting this investigation can be. In Citizenship and Democratic Doubt Taylor uses Addams’s analysis of the Pullman strike to give a sensitive, sophisticated reading of her moral philosophy and conception of democratic citizenship. Like others, he claims that Addams’s insights about ethics and democracy came from her experiences at Hull House and exemplify “how to do social theory from the inside out.”[44] More so than other scholars, Taylor gathers together several of Addams’s evolutionary references and tries to interpret them in light of her moral and political observations that he so much admires. He calls such references “pure wishful thinking” and the “Achilles’ heel of her democratic ethics.” He concludes that they indicate “an uncharacteristic intellectual laziness and even a kind of intellectual dishonesty,” stating, “Darwinism has no teleology and no obvious sociological import whatsoever.”[45]

Taylor is to be commended for attending to evolutionary references in Addams’s writings, agonizing over them, and attempting to place them alongside her democratic commitments. His account illustrates how these references are indeed troubling to those unaware of how ubiquitous and varied evolutionary thought was in Addams’s time. In a sense, he tries to “save” Addams by claiming she based her theorizing on her life experiences as a social reformer. This sets up the tension of wanting to show that Addams was an intellectual and theorist, while failing to recognize that she used what every intellectual and theorist uses: the intellectual resources available in his or her time and place. In Addams’s era, these resources were infused with evolutionary patterns, and Addams used them deliberately and extensively.

If one wants to claim that Addams was an intellectual, then one needs to explore the full range of intellectual resources with which she in fact engaged. Instead of ignoring or criticizing Addams for using social evolutionary patterns of thought, my aim is to see what Addams does with them. Which theorists does she draw on, and how does she use their materials? How does she deal with tensions within the discourse, and how does the discourse make it difficult for her to say what we today might want or expect her to say? And, most important, how does Addams use the discourse in constructing her method of ethical deliberation? Answering these questions makes it possible to evaluate Addams’s writings in a more nuanced way. While some used social evolutionary theorizing as a hammer of domination, Addams put it to work on behalf of the oppressed. She shaped it with subtlety to criticize the powerful, while also appealing to their moral sensibilities. Creativity is granular. It cracks open crevices in the assumed geology of thought. While the Addams in this study may seem distant and strange, she also emerges as a creative and sophisticated theorist and literary artist, working with her era’s full panoply of intellectual resources.

Reading Addams

Undergraduate philosophy students are often grateful when Democracy and Social Ethics shows up on the syllabus. “She is so easy to read,” they say, comparing her with stiff standard fare by Aristotle, Descartes, and Kant. Unaware of the complications that lie below the text’s surface, students are charmed by Addams’s storytelling. Biographer Louise W. Knight, recalling one of Addams’s stories, notes, “Addams’s voice here is that of the novelist she might have become.” Literary scholar Katherine Joslin describes Addams’s approach to writing as turning literary naturalism “inside out by making social science more like imaginative fiction.”[46] Knight and Joslin are right to attend to the literary dimensions of Addams’s prose. Addams made sociological observations and scientific theorizing more literary by incorporating storytelling and multiple voices into her texts. I hope to capture how Addams’s literary imagination intersected with scientific debates within social evolutionary discourse.

Addams shaped her writings with considerable rhetorical skill. She had studied rhetoric and oratory in college; her books reflect the orator’s quest to enlist ethos and pathos, as well as logos.[47] Nineteenth-century rhetoric texts taught speakers how to appeal to audience members’ imagination, emotions, and will, as well as their reason. Engaging their sympathies was critical. Addams followed the advice of Alexander Bain, author of her college rhetoric text, to evoke sympathy “by representing in lively colors the pains of others.”[48] Adams Sherman Hill, then Harvard professor of rhetoric and oratory, reinforced the point with a quotation from English theologian John Henry Newman, who observed, “Deductions have no power of persuasion. The heart is commonly reached, not through the reason, but through the imagination, by means of direct impressions, by the testimony of facts and events, by history, by description.”[49] Evolutionary psychologists thought that reason lacked the power to change behavior. Used alone, it was incapable of generating the sympathy that would enable a person to act in response to the needs and conditions of others.[50]

Rhetoric is the art of persuasion, and as rhetorician Margaret Marshall points out, Addams used rhetoric as a form of social activism.[51] In many of her speeches and essays, Addams employed rhetorical techniques to persuade her audiences to enact specific social reforms: to support women’s suffrage, to amend child labor legislation so it included newsboys, to use the interstate commerce clause to ensure that milk stayed sanitary on its trip from Wisconsin dairy farm to Chicago tenement stoop. Addams reshaped these materials in crafting her books. While her books contain calls for social reform, she aimed more deeply, using literary and rhetorical techniques to change her readers’ moral sensibilities and stretch their moral imaginations.

In doing so, Addams was working within well-established literary and scientific patterns. Historian Daniel Wickberg describes nineteenth-century conceptions of the sensibilities as “bringing together the elements of sense perception, cognition, emotion, aesthetic form, moral judgment, and cultural difference.”[52] He points to abolitionist literature in the United States and Great Britain that sought to move readers’ sensibilities until every perception and thought of slavery was thoroughly dyed with its cruelty.[53] In her narratives Addams also sought to reshape her readers’ sensibilities. In many of their minds, a news report about a city boy stealing coal from the railroad tracks called up images of urban juvenile delinquents from criminally inclined, morally deficient southern European immigrants. Addams repositioned the news report within images of a peasant family newly arrived from the countryside, the boy eager to help his parents find heating fuel.[54] Addams hoped to enable her readers to replace the first set of images with the second, reshaping their perceptions and feelings toward the new Americans they had initially feared.

Evolutionary scientists whose work Addams used explored how people’s modes of perceiving, feeling, and valuing shape and shade the way they experience the world. People’s ideas are enmeshed in these; logic cannot float free of them in consciousness. Psychologist and philosopher William James sees all these elements flowing together in the stream of consciousness. English political theorist Graham Wallas describes the mind as “a harp, all of whose strings throb together; so that emotion, impulse, inference, and the special kind of inference called reasoning, are often simultaneous and intermingled aspects of a single mental experience.”[55] In her narratives Addams activated these harp strings with agility.

In an exquisite passage in The Second Twenty Years at Hull-House, Addams reminisces on how she sought solace from the brutalities of world war in the stability of the Swiss Alps, formations as permanent as geological time permits. Addams writes, “The human power for action mysteriously depends upon our capacity to throw into imaginative form that which we already know, upon a generous impulse to let it determine our deeds.” This sentence, an unattributed paraphrase of a passage in Percy Bysshe Shelley’s A Defense of Poetry, is an apt guide to how Addams constructed her texts.[56] “That which we already know” includes Addams’s vast knowledge of the sciences and humanities. She does not apply these so much as transpose, invert, and juxtapose them in surprising ways. Addams writes texts the way musicians play with tones, timbres, and rhythms. Throwing all that we know into imaginative form is a task for a synthesizer, and Addams’s friends and colleagues perceived her that way. Hull House resident and journalist Francis Hackett observed, “One cannot talk to her for five minutes . . . without realizing that hers is the great gift of synthesis, of bringing things to unity, by ‘patience, subtlety and breadth.’”[57]

Addams rarely responded to arguments with counterarguments. She rarely attacked. Her hesitancy to do so should not be attributed to lack of clarity or conviction, nor as accommodating the status quo. Rhetorician Robert Danisch writes that Addams adopted a “cooperative rhetoric” rather than an agonistic one, as more suited to her cooperative vision of social democracy.[58] One-time Hull House intern Jean McNary decades later recalled Addams saying, “I don’t use dynamite words; they stiffen people’s necks.”[59] Even if Addams’s exact words had dimmed in McNary’s memory, the sentiment expressed sounds just right. The function of literature, Addams believed, was to overcome isolation and bring people into “the stream of kindly human fellowship.”[60] Her writings are literary creations, crafted to do that. She aimed to soften her readers’ prejudices and enable them to listen to the voices they generally ignored.

Addams’s reading of evolutionary science, her imaginative writing, and her conception of social reform all run in parallel. Evolutionary change is incremental as organisms and environments make mutual adaptations. Through her writings Addams seeks incremental alterations in moral sensibilities and imagination, as these capacities are integral to reforming actions and habits. Social reform must proceed at a pace concomitant with human capabilities and frailties. To be effective, it should also be gradual so that linkages among instincts, habits, and actions can be reset. Recognizing Addams’s use of social evolutionary discourse, set within imaginative forms, reveals the logic and sensibility of her layered ethical analyses.

Addams’s Words

Readers may find it difficult to insert themselves inside the discourse of social evolutionary theorizing and sort through the dense syntheses Addams knits into her texts. It is particularly challenging to do so with texts of a mere century ago that are peppered with ordinary words such as “democracy” and “sympathy.” To follow Addams’s reasoning, readers need to take those words out of the penumbras of associations that now feel natural and relocate them within a discourse they find remote and sometimes morally objectionable. In the pages that follow I immerse readers in that discourse by placing Addams’s words within the larger discussions that gave them meaning and significance. The intricacy with which Addams and her contemporaries webbed together key terms and ideas of the discourse thus becomes apparent. I hope readers will be able to detach themselves from habitual patterns of thought and imagine their way into those of the late nineteenth century.

Scholars call this method “explicating” or “unpacking” a text. My task is to place Addams’s words and phrases under a microscope and turn up the magnification. I read key passages very closely to make explicit the meanings and assumptions they implicitly contain. These meanings are located in the penumbras, ones Addams’s educated readers, on hearing a word or phrase, reflexively assigned to it. While there is continuity in the terms’ denotations from the late nineteenth century to the present, the penumbras of these terms have shifted considerably. Contemporary Addams scholars have rightly identified Addams’s intentions and methods in Democracy and Social Ethics, but reading the text with today’s understandings of terms such as democracy, sympathy, cooperation, and motive yields a thinner understanding than the text held for Addams’s contemporaries.

Addams did not make this easy to do. The trail from Addams’s words to the particular theorists who served as her interlocutors is obscure. She liked to quote and paraphrase other authors but rarely documented her sources. Some quoted passages lack quotation marks. At times Addams gives no indication that she is paraphrasing from other texts. When her editor, Richard Ely, asked her to add footnotes to her second book, Newer Ideals of Peace, to make it more scholarly, Addams replied, “I did not do that in ‘Democracy and Social Ethics,’ and assumed that the book was to be kept popular and colloquial in style rather than exact and scholarly.”[61] In this, Addams was following practices used by other writers. One striking example is in The Souls of Black Folk, where W. E. B. Du Bois recounts when he first became aware of racial prejudice. As a school classmate refused his visiting card, “the shades of the prison-house closed round about us all.” Du Bois felt no need to place quotation marks around the phrase or to tell his readers that it comes straight out of Wordsworth.[62] Romantic poets, the King James Bible, Shakespeare, and ancient Greek and Roman texts functioned as a public repository of expressions, free for the borrowing. William James in his essay “The Moral Equivalent of War” followed an abbreviated documentation practice that Addams also used. James gives one casual mention to American economist Simon Patten and to English political theorist Lowes Dickinson.[63] Only by digging out the texts James had in mind and comparing them with James’s essay does one discover that several of James’s passages form a virtual dialogue among these authors.[64] An author could fulfill documentation requirements for an entire essay by one quick mention of a name.

Sometimes Addams inserted a quotation because she liked it, but knowing the source does not illuminate the meaning of the larger passage in which the quote is inserted. In these cases, I ignore the quotation or at most mention its source in passing. But sometimes, knowing the source opens up the significance and shape of what Addams is saying; that is, it fills out the late nineteenth-century penumbras of words and ideas. In these cases, I read the authors from whom Addams borrows to see what insights they give into Addams’s meanings and intentions. This enables me to name with specificity the particular theorists and theories of social evolution Addams’s employs in each essay and to identify the ones she returns to most often. Thus, identifying Addams’s sources is preliminary to explicating the text and reconstructing the argument. This kind of close reading has not been given to Addams’s texts. It is through close textual analysis that the influence of evolutionary science emerges, and these analyses function as evidence for my claims.

Identifying Addams’s sources and examining her seemingly odd syntax and turns of phrase does far more than supply the documentation she omitted. It opens the gateway to the intellectual world in which Addams lived, worked, and thought. This was a world in which social reformers were theorists, intellectuals were activists, scientists were storytellers, artists were scientifically attuned, and scientists and artists alike understood that working for human betterment was an integral requirement of their calling. These linkages had penetrated into the very meanings of keywords. Democracy, science, sympathy, association, cooperation, motive, and more bear their impress. The close textual analyses given here enable today’s readers to enter Addams’s intellectual world and come closer to experiencing the original fullness of Democracy and Social Ethics.

This method of textual analysis shifts Addams’s position from sole author of a text to that of a participant in a vast, international conversation about the day’s most pressing social problems. Addams gives a useful image of this participation in “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements,” the subject of chapter 1. Here Addams compares the work of the settlement to a thousand voices singing Handel’s “Hallelujah Chorus.” The more cultivated voices can be distinguished, but they are given volume and strength by joining in unity with the chorus.[65]

Addams’s texts are solo performances only in a superficial sense. In them, the chorus includes her immigrant neighbors, her fellow residents at Hull House, her fellow reformers, and the intellectual world in which she participated. When a soloist performs with a chorus, she quite literally does not sing the same music she rehearsed in the practice room. In performance, at every instant, the soloist listens to what the chorus sings and subtly shapes musical textures and inflections in response. She accompanies them as much as they accompany her. Sometimes, as is typical in operas, Addams and the chorus may represent different characters and sing different words. Think of Addams’s texts as her solo voice performing with sensitivity to the voices all around her.

Addams took a decade to develop the evolutionary patterns of reasoning and ethical analysis she would use in Democracy and Social Ethics. It is difficult to identify these patterns by focusing on the book itself, so I take an indirect route. Before discussing Democracy and Social Ethics, I first analyze essays Addams wrote in the 1890s. Given that my purpose is to track how Addams used social evolutionary thinking in developing her method of ethical deliberation, I have chosen to examine her writings chronologically, going essay by essay through the 1890s and up to publication of Democracy and Social Ethics in 1902. Addams revised many of these essays as chapters in Democracy and Social Ethics, although she does not arrange them chronologically in the book.

Addams did not intend in these essays to generate a general theory of democracy or of social ethics. She wanted to address the concrete social problems of her day. Her aim in each essay was to figure out what to do, how to resolve the problem if possible, or at least to ameliorate the suffering it caused. Each essay taken singly is an instantiation of Addams’s method, a case study of its use. I begin the discussion of each essay by sketching out the specific morally troubling situation Addams addresses—labor strife, municipal corruption, familial tensions, tensions in charity work and in educating immigrants and their children. Because these tensions were covered in the daily press, there was no need for Addams to provide full details in the essays themselves. I then give a close reading of each essay by reconstructing its argument and explicating passages. Doing so enables me to identify the theoretical resources Addams employs and show how the penumbras of her words enter into her patterns of reasoning.

These essays and Democracy and Social Ethics could be approached differently, of course. One might highlight themes across the essays, focusing separately on, for example, gender, race, and class; or the economic, political, and familial arenas; or how Addams uses science, literature, and then philosophical and theological perspectives. Organizing an analysis thematically would yield valuable insights into Addams’s thinking and activism. However, doing so would break up the synthesis of theoretical materials with a situation’s concrete details that is integral to her method of ethical deliberation. Addams weaves the particulars of each situation into the warp and woof of her deliberations. Some thematic concerns and patterns of reasoning recur in multiple essays but not in a formulaic or determinative way. One cannot take one of her analyses, strip away situational content, and then generalize on how she would resolve other cases.

To grasp how Addams developed her method of ethical deliberation over the decade, a more suitable image is needed than the usual linear one of going from immaturity to maturity or from inchoate to fully formed. A better image for Addams’s pattern of development is the musical form of theme and variations. This is a universal form, found in jazz performances and Indian ragas and employed frequently in Western classical music. While the theme is present in the variations, each variation reveals the theme from new angles of perception as the voices layer in different patterns, and tones and rhythms are inflected in new ways. The cumulative effect is a richer experience of the theme’s meanings.

Although Addams never states it this way, she analyzes each situation both as it presented itself at that time and as part of a historical trajectory. I call these the geographical and the historical axes and designate them as Addams’s “theme.” These axes map onto “social statics” and “social dynamics,” the terms sociologists gave to the two branches of their discipline. These axes functioned as templates, as Addams varies the evolutionary theories she uses to define them. She also varies which segments of the historical axis to employ as well as which point of view to emphasize. Sometimes employers’ voices dominate, sometimes those of the workers. In some essays Addams stresses the immigrants’ points of view and in others she attends to the perspectives of the native born. Because each essay is short and focuses on a specific social issue, each presentation gives only a partial demonstration of Addams’s method. By layering the essays onto each other, it becomes possible to grasp the method’s analytic potential. Because Addams uses her method creatively and flexibly, words and phrases like “fuller,” “deeper,” and “more multifaceted” describe the cumulative effect better than “mature” or “fully formed.”

Chapters 1 and 2 deal with essays Addams did not include in Democracy and Social Ethics, but they are critical in laying out its groundwork. Chapter 1 examines “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements,” Addams’s first published essay and one of her most widely read. She reproduced a large portion of it in Twenty Years at Hull-House.[66] I dig below the surface of the text to identify the evolutionary materials Addams implicitly invokes and construct an initial sort of annotated bibliography she will expand throughout the decade. I also point out hints of the rhetorical strategies Addams will refine in later essays. Chapter 2 examines “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement.” This essay is the first variation of Addams’s method of ethical deliberation and the first presentation of its theme. Addams employs the geographical and historical axes to understand the era’s labor struggles and to find ethical guidance emerging from within these struggles.

In chapter 3 I explore three essays Addams wrote in the mid-1890s and revised as chapters in Democracy and Social Ethics. In these essays Addams uses British socialist accounts of the evolution of democracy out of feudalism and adapts them to serve as the historical axis. She diagnoses the social problems under consideration as cases in which relationships structured by nondemocratic, feudal hierarchies persist and cause social disequilibrium. In these variations Addams emphasizes the psychological costs of living within relationships still structured by feudal patterns.

In chapters 4 and 5 I examine essays Addams wrote in the late 1890s and also revised as chapters in Democracy and Social Ethics. For the historical axis Addams employs a German anthropological history of ethics from the earliest human cultures to the present. Addams conceives of the city as a moral geology, with citizens of several strata of ethical evolution living side by side. She uses this moral geology to criticize those with power in politics, charity administration, and education for failing to understand and respond to the voices and needs of recent immigrants.

Chapter 6 analyzes Addams’s 1899 essay “A Function of the Social Settlement.” Addams did not include this essay in Democracy and Social Ethics, but it demonstrates the maturing of two elements of her thought that had been percolating throughout the 1890s. The first was her identification of the social settlement as the place where the culminating step of the process of scientific investigation, that of verification, is performed. The second element is Addams’s capacity to derive wisdom from authors with whom she had fundamental disagreements and shape it with rhetorical skill.

In the final chapter I show how in Democracy and Social Ethics Addams uses the movement from individual ethics to social ethics as the historical axis, substituting it for the British socialist and German anthropological accounts she had used in the essays. This new iteration of the theme fits awkwardly on the original essays and masks much of their evolutionary content. The paradox of Democracy and Social Ethics is that in leaving its contents conceptually untidy, Addams produced a richer and more enduring text, one that invites her readers to participate as members of the chorus.

Beyond Jane Addams’s Evolutionary Theorizing

Addams was very much a woman of her time. Rather than diminishing the significance of her work by dating it, reading Democracy and Social Ethics in its time, as an orchestration of multiple voices, opens up imaginative possibilities for interpretation and benefit.

Addams’s voice is one of the most significant in the quest for social justice in American history. The current image of Addams is as an effective social justice reformer and a theorist of democracy. Jane Addams’s Evolutionary Theorizing deepens and complicates this image. By giving a detailed account of how Addams theorized within social evolutionary discourse, this study demonstrates that Addams was also a scientist, as science was understood at the time. Her activism was a form of testing scientific hypotheses. Addams could have titled her book “Democracy as Social Ethics” to indicate that it was a projection of what those terms could come to mean if people made appropriate interventions into the social evolutionary process. Addams’s hope and aim was that “democracy” and “social ethics” would become equivalent in definition and lived experience.

Democracy and Social Ethics was the first of Addams’s ten single-authored books. I regard its conceptual inconsistencies (as detailed in chapter 7) as marking an inflection point in Addams’s continual search for theoretical perspectives with which to address injustices. Over her adult life Addams kept current with new scientific offerings. While she employed theoretical materials she had used in the 1890s in her later works, her references to them are often fleeting and tucked within more recent scientific findings. Jane Addams’s Evolutionary Theorizing, by developing in detail the theoretical materials Addams brought to Democracy and Social Ethics, will aid in decoding Addams’s subsequent writings.

While this study focuses on Addams, it also points to how widespread the discourse of social evolutionary theorizing was in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. By mapping out the conception of science prevalent at that time and making explicit the penumbras of key terms, this study opens up new ways of interpreting that era’s texts. It also helps explain why so many social scientists at the time engaged in social reform. Today’s scholars of the progressive era generally attribute these scientists’ motivations to religious, philanthropic, and ethical commitments. In addition to these factors, these scientists placed the obligation to work for social reform squarely within the meaning of science itself.[67]

This study widens current accounts of the European sources early American pragmatists drew upon. In contrast to Charles Sanders Peirce’s emphasis on Kant and John Dewey’s on Hegel, I show how Addams drew extensively from British socialists and the offspring of Comtean positivism. This study also deepens our understanding of the intellectual relationship between Addams and Dewey. Older accounts assumed Dewey was the guiding influence on Addams’s adoption of pragmatism. Charlene Haddock Seigfried, by carefully analyzing Dewey’s lecture notes on Democracy and Social Ethics, discovered that Addams was the complete pragmatist when Dewey was still shedding his Hegelian idealism.[68] Jane Addams’s Evolutionary Theorizing furthers Seigfried’s line of inquiry by demonstrating how Addams developed a pragmatist method of ethics well before Dewey articulated virtually the same method in abstract form in his 1908 book, Ethics.[69]

Figure 1. Jane Addams, scientist, 1940. First Day Cover Stamp issued by the US Postal Service, Apr. 26, 1940, as part of the Postal Service’s “Famous American” series of postage stamps. Courtesy of the Smithsonian Institution, National Postal Museum.

As indicated above, scholars, students, and citizens today draw inspiration from Addams’s life and writings. They are doing excellent work in bringing out how Addams’s insights on community, poverty, gender and race relations, and grassroots activism can inform our own work on behalf of social justice. In this book I step back from these specific issues to examine the larger patterns of Addams’s thought. Her methodology is a model of interdisciplinary, integrative thinking. If Addams were alive today, she would not conceptualize people and societies as primitive or civilized. She would not debate what it means to be civilized or seek steps to advance civilization’s ascent. These were salient questions in her day, and in addressing them Addams made full use of the scientific and artistic resources at her disposal. If she were living now, she would steep herself in cognitive science, neuropsychology, environmental sciences, media studies, and more. Seeing how Addams in her day used the sciences in formulating a method of ethical analysis can suggest how we might do the same in ours.

The larger patterns of Addams’s thought can aid us in revitalizing our understanding of citizenship and democracy. When I ask students what democracy means to them, they invariably talk about individual rights and the freedom to do whatever they want. They refer to the Declaration of Independence, explain that all persons have rights, and identify government’s primary task as protecting these rights. This conception of democracy with the detached individual at its center is stubbornly embedded in many citizens’ habits of thought. Addams’s writings make us realize how truncated and distorted this conception is. Sociologists no longer describe society as a social organism, but the sensibilities that lie in that image’s penumbra of associations are ones we need today. Closest to its center is the responsibility to respond to the needs of others. Addams and her intellectual colleagues placed their understanding of freedom and rights within the psychological, social, and geographical interconnections that link us together. Freedom is achieved and rights respected when society’s members are nourished by and in turn nourish each other.

John Dewey wrote to his wife, Alice, about his discussions with Addams during the Pullman strike. He recounted Addams saying “that we freed the slaves by war and had now to free them all over again individually, and pay the costs of the war and reckon with the added bitterness of the Southerner beside &c &c.”[70] To Addams, the Civil War would not be over until relations between those of African descent and of European descent are healed. In Addams’s mind, this is the image of democracy to which we should aspire. Laws and governmental policies are essential for justice, but they are not enough.

Addams does not give a complete analysis of politics and morality in Democracy and Social Ethics. She does not deny that some people and some actions are evil, but that is not the book’s terrain. Addams is most concerned with misunderstandings that occur among people of goodwill whose honestly held conceptions of the good do not align. Today, as public discourse becomes increasingly shrill and divisive, we would do well to follow Addams’s example of listening with patience and civility. Addams knew that bringing people into “the stream of kindly human fellowship” was essential for achieving social justice.[71] Her sympathy and generosity of spirit were more than personality traits; they are requirements for democracy.

In her analysis of what role settlements should play in the labor movement, Addams names “self-distrust” as a crucial dimension of inquiry. She felt humbled by the enormity of the challenges she faced and regarded each step of her analyses as tentative and potentially flawed. The limitations of social evolutionary theorizing are obvious to us now. Future generations will laugh at our own attempts to ameliorate social ills, asking, How could they ever think that? This is the human condition. We can only do the best we can with the conceptual tools we have and the moral sensitivities we foster. What Addams accomplished within social evolutionary discourse is staggering; one realizes how staggering when the discourse and its limitations are clarified. Our tools for thinking and for social change are likewise limited and inadequate for the tasks that confront us. We should approach these tasks with as much creativity and good judgment as we can muster and, above all, with sympathy and humility. Addams shows us how.

Chapter 1

An Evolving Democracy

“I agree with every word,” Samuel Barnett of London’s Toynbee Hall wrote to Addams upon reading “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements” and “The Objective Value of a Social Settlement.”[1] Others concurred. These two essays, the first ones Addams published, solidified Addams’s reputation as a leader in the rapidly growing social settlement movement. The body of “Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements” can be read as a prelude to the theoretical orientations and rhetorical modes of presentation Addams would refine throughout the next decade. Although Addams names very few of the theorists or theories her words presuppose, she leaves some clues for identifying them. These clues may be as subtle as syntax or located in the penumbras of the words she uses. By reading “Subjective Necessity” closely, major strands of Victorian evolutionary theorizing can be identified and an initial sort of annotated bibliography for Democracy and Social Ethics can be established.

Addams and her colleagues in the settlement movement faced a world changing at a dizzying pace. In the final decades of the nineteenth century, industrialization and migration transformed cities across the United States and Europe. Migrants from rural areas and abroad streamed into these cities to meet the growing need for laborers. Existing municipal infrastructure proved inadequate for the burgeoning populations. As urban poverty and suffering became concentrated, these cities also became centers for social experimentation. Leading social theorists, seeking to understand and reform these cities, formed transatlantic networks. They exchanged data on many dimensions of urban life and circulated policy proposals.[2] They also shared social theories with which to frame these proposals, theories set within the discourse of human social evolution. Within a few years of founding Hull House in 1889, Jane Addams became a central figure in these networks.[3] Her writings reflect her participation in these networks and her reliance on social evolutionary theorizing.

When Addams founded Hull House, she had already had substantial international experience that enabled her to slip easily into these transatlantic networks. She spent two and a half years during the 1880s traveling throughout Europe and studying its history, languages, and culture.[4] In June 1888 Addams, then twenty-seven years old, visited Toynbee Hall, a social settlement in the working class neighborhood of London’s East End. Founded by Samuel and Henrietta Barnett, Toynbee Hall provided a setting in which people of different social classes could mix. The settlement offered educational classes and cultural and recreational opportunities to its neighbors. Its residents, primarily affiliated with Oxford and Cambridge Universities, worked for social reforms in the neighborhood in housing, public health, and labor conditions.[5] Addams established contacts with English social reformers during her time in London and was inspired to adapt the social settlement idea in the United States. In September 1889 she and Ellen Gates Starr, a college friend, opened Hull House in Chicago’s Nineteenth Ward on the city’s Near West Side.

Chicago was an immigrant—and hence an international—city from the beginning. The first nonindigenous person to establish permanent residence at the trading site there was Jean Baptiste Pointe du Sable, of West African and French descent.[6] By 1837 Chicago was a city of four thousand inhabitants. In the next two decades Chicago’s population increased twentyfold to eighty-four thousand, as immigrants from Ireland and Germany came in large numbers, quickly followed by people from Scandinavia and Great Britain.[7] By 1856, when Charles Hull built his “country retreat” at the city’s edge, Chicago had a higher percentage of immigrants than any other large American city save Milwaukee.[8] By 1880 Chicago’s population had reached 500,000. The neighborhood around the Hull mansion had become densely populated with immigrants, as people from southern and eastern Europe joined their counterparts from northern and western Europe.[9] When Addams and Starr founded the settlement house a decade later, the city’s population had doubled to over one million. Almost 80 percent of Chicago’s residents at the time were immigrants and their children. The fifty thousand people packed into Chicago’s Nineteenth Ward were Italian, German, Polish, Russian, Bohemian, Irish, French Canadian, and other nationalities.[10]

The multinational character of Addams’s immediate surroundings contributed in crucial ways to her thinking. Not only did she quickly become acquainted with a wide range of cultural practices, she also became immersed in ideas and modes of theorizing from the immigrants’ nations of origin. While many of Chicago’s immigrants were uneducated, some were intellectually sophisticated. Intellectuals and political leaders from abroad visited their conationals in Chicago and often paid a call at Hull House.[11] Evolutionary perspectives threaded through their conversations. The way Addams incorporated these perspectives into her earliest speeches and essays is evident in “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements.”

Addams delivered “Subjective Necessity” and “Objective Value” in July 1892 as lectures at the School of Applied Ethics, a six-week summer school affiliated with Felix Adler’s Society for Ethical Culture.[12] University of Michigan economist Henry Carter Adams organized sessions for the summer school’s Department of Economics, choosing “social progress” as the curriculum’s theme.[13] He, Jane Addams, and the other lecturers at the conference located the meaning of this theme within the conception of society as an evolving social organism.

To adapt a phrase from William James, the image of the social organism was at the center of most intellectuals’ vision, including Addams’s.[14] Early in the nineteenth century this image was present in idealism and romanticism. Evolutionists throughout the century adapted it to fit their own theorizing by noting the ways in which biological organisms and social groups function analogously. Herbert Spencer stirred in the idea that progress occurs as biological and social organisms become more highly differentiated and integrated in structure and function, thus achieving greater complexity.[15] The social theorists and reformers with whom Addams worked routinely described society as an organism, with its inhabitants, customs, and institutions continually undergoing disequilibrium and readaptation. University of Chicago sociologist Albion Small, who served with Addams in Chicago’s Civic Federation, thought it an undeniable truism that society is a social organism. Within a given society, persons and groups function within complex webs of interdependency.[16] In their interactions, each modifies the others. These mutual modifications, Small notes, take place in society’s industrial and domestic relations, as well as in tastes, morals, religious practices and beliefs, and people’s hopes and fears.[17] The process of modification is uneven, resulting in social disequilibrium. Some members of the social organism may experience suffering and loss. To find relief, they and other members of the society must find ways of establishing a new equilibrium.

As the health of the social organism depends on the well-being of its inhabitants, ethical concerns permeated social scientific thinking. Beatrice Potter Webb, English economist, social reformer, and friend of Addams, spoke for many when she characterized the age as uniting scientific investigation as the means for solving social problems with the “consciousness of a new motive; the transference of the emotion of self-sacrificing service from God to man.”[18] These were precisely the concerns Henry Carter Adams had in mind in planning the summer school’s sessions. His aim was to bring “the complex relations of modern life” and “the claims of man’s moral nature” into adjustment.[19] This reflected the mission of the School of Applied Ethics as a whole. Founded to address social dislocations caused by extensive labor unrest, the school explored ways to bring the various components and functions of the social organism into harmony.[20]

Addams lectured during a week devoted to “Philanthropy in Social Progress.” Henry Carter Adams introduced Addams as “the guiding spirit of Hull House in Chicago, probably the most influential Settlement in this country.”[21] In her second lecture, “The Objective Value of a Social Settlement,” Addams’s description of the physical condition of her neighborhood would have sounded familiar to many in the audience. As in their cities, Chicago’s Hull House neighborhood lacked sanitation, tenement houses were flimsily built, and the streets were poorly paved, if at all. Working conditions were unregulated; workers were ill paid and frequently injured. Addams also described many of the activities and programs of the settlement, including social clubs for children and adults, a vast array of educational offerings and vocational classes, a kindergarten and a coffee house, and assistance to help new immigrants navigate the city’s services.[22] While audience members were familiar with a range of benevolent organizations that offered similar programs, they would have been impressed by Hull House’s vitality and the sheer number and variety of activities offered there.[23]

The two introductory paragraphs of Addams’s first lecture, “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements,” point out the economic and psychological impacts of living in a time of rapid change. Addams writes, “Hull House endeavors to make social intercourse express the growing sense of the economic unity of society.”[24] By 1890 the ideal of economic self-sufficiency for individuals and families was little more than nostalgia for much of the country’s population. Rapid industrialization and urbanization had fundamentally reshaped economic relations into dense patterns of interdependence. Social relations, however, between rich and poor and among the many immigrant groups remained distant at best. Historian Daniel Rodgers observes, “Though a place of fractures and fragments, the city was at the same time an enormous collectivity. . . . City dwellers lived in a web of mutual dependency that was at once extraordinarily powerful and barely visible.”[25] Addams’s task in this essay is to consider how to overcome this fragmentation so that social relations expressed the same interdependence as economic ones.

This would require more than policy proposals. Economist John R. Commons clarified the dimensions of the task, writing,

The problem of poverty is not an isolated problem. It is a part of all the social questions of today—of the questions of labor, of crime, of intemperance. On account of the organic nature of society these problems are laced and interlaced—they act and react on one another. The causes and remedies of poverty can be comprehended only through an understanding of its relations to the whole social organism; and this involves a thorough acquaintance with human nature, with the laws of psychology and biology.[26]

In “Subjective Necessity” Addams focuses on psychological mechanisms rooted in biology and history that motivated settlement work. The settlement movement, Addams writes, is “based not only upon conviction, but genuine emotion [as] . . . educated young people are seeking an outlet for that sentiment of universal brotherhood which the best spirit of our times is forcing from an emotion into a motive.”[27] This statement signaled the complex relationships psychologists then posited among intellect, emotions, and the motivation to act. All are needed for the task at hand.

Addams organizes “Subjective Necessity” around what she calls “three great lines” of motives for settlement work. These are, in Addams’s words, “the desire to make the entire social organism democratic,” “the impulse to share the race life,” and “a certain renaissance of Christianity.”[28] In describing them, Addams in effect integrates physiology, emotion, and intellect with the motivation to act. These three lines of motives represent three major strands of Victorian evolutionary thought: theories of historical progress toward democracy, of evolutionary biology, and of the evolution of religion. It is difficult for readers unfamiliar with late nineteenth-century evolutionary thought to recognize these strands of reasoning. Addams does not lay out their theoretical contents in a systematic way, but her syntax and her words’ penumbras of association carry these evolutionary assumptions.

“The Desire to Make the Entire Social Organism Democratic”

With the first line of motives, Addams claims, settlements are responding to the “subjective pressure . . . to make the entire social organism democratic.” American democracy has been only partially achieved because it does not extend into patterns of social interactions. “The social organism,” Addams explains, “has broken down through large districts of our great cities. . . . [The poor live] without fellowship, without local tradition or public spirit, without social organization of any kind.”[29] Rich and poor are socially isolated from each other even though they live side by side. Poor people’s energies are consumed with meeting the bare necessities of subsistence. Meanwhile, those with the money and leisure to enjoy the arts, education, and social gatherings stay away from the poor. Educated young people apprehend this disparity intellectually as they note the gap between the social realities of city life and their own beliefs in democracy and the kinship of all humanity. They also apprehend the disparity emotionally, as they are troubled when their own actions do not address the city’s glaring social divisions. They seek a motive strong enough to turn these beliefs and feelings into action.[30] In settlements, Addams suggests, such young people find this motive as they encounter opportunities to enter into relations of fellowship with the poor and to open spaces for educational, cultural, and social exchange between social classes.

To explain her claim that settlement residents aim “to make the entire social organism democratic,” Addams introduces her conception of democracy as a historical, evolving phenomenon. She will develop this conception extensively in later essays and use it as the basis of her analyses in three chapters in Democracy and Social Ethics. Addams writes, “We are perhaps entering upon the second phase of democracy, as the French philosophers entered upon the first.”[31] In presenting democracy as an evolutionary process, Addams amplifies the conception of democracy she shares with the Society of Ethical Culture. In his introduction to the published collection of the week’s lectures, Henry Carter Adams notes that these lectures carry “a strongly marked vein of democratic sentiment.” He clarifies that by democracy he is not referring to a form of government but to “a social ideal, a purpose, a feeling.”[32]

Addams’s reference to the first phase of democracy reflected the widely held view that the French Revolution marked the turning point in civilization’s evolution from feudalism to democracy. English historian and journalist Frederic Harrison, to whose writings Addams often turned, exuberantly exclaimed that the year 1789 “marks a greater evolution in human history . . . [than] any other single date which could be named between the reign of the first Pharaoh and the reign of Victoria.”[33] Bringing democracy into social relations across class differences is, for Addams, an aspect of the second phase of democracy.

Addams’s language here reflects her reading of Giuseppe Mazzini and Arnold Toynbee. While biographers have noted that Mazzini and Toynbee were among Addams’s favorite authors, the way Addams linked and adapted their ideas has not been explored.[34] In her 1890s essays Addams often refers to Mazzini. Of the two great political exiles living in London in the mid-nineteenth century, Addams consistently chooses Mazzini over Marx to support her thinking. He had been a hero of her father’s; many of Addams’s Italian neighbors revered him.[35] Addams studied Mazzini’s writings when she attended lectures on the United Italy Movement at Johns Hopkins University in 1885–1886.[36] In The Duties of Man Mazzini describes how the French Revolution, fought in the name of rights and liberty, had brought political democracy to France. Subsequently, however, the conditions under which working people lived “deteriorated” and became more “precarious.”[37] In “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall,” an earlier version of Addams’s lectures at the summer school, Addams recommends English economic historian Arnold Toynbee’s Lectures on the Industrial Revolution for its comprehensive account of how working-class conditions had deteriorated.[38] (Arnold Toynbee, after whom Toynbee Hall was named, was the uncle of the famous historian of the same name.) Toynbee describes in vivid detail how during the Industrial Revolution employers and employees began to live increasingly separate lives, in contrast to the close, familial village relations they had under feudalism. As old village life was replaced by manufacturing towns, the working poor sank deeper into pauperism, while the owners gained great wealth.[39]

Toynbee places Mazzini’s vision within an evolutionary frame. He rejects the Enlightenment view that economic laws of supply and demand are natural, eternal truths standing outside of history. Instead, he claims, the so-called laws of economics are products of historical evolution, arising within and only suitable for given locations and time spans. The proper extent and nature of governmental involvement in the economy varies with “the nature of each particular state and the stage of its civilization.”[40] Political rights achieved in the first phase of democracy had not brought economic well-being to the poor. Instead, the gulf between rich and poor grew as the two classes became increasingly estranged from one another. Toynbee proposes that industry, too, be made democratic through labor unions for workers and through boards of conciliation composed of both workers and employers.[41]

Addams uses Toynbee’s adaptation of Mazzini to build her case and then extends their theorizing into the social arena. Like Mazzini and Toynbee, Addams describes how industrial conditions bring misery to the overworked, enervated, impoverished residents of the city. Unlike Mazzini and Toynbee, who focus primarily on the lack of democracy in the economic realm, Addams focuses on the lack of democracy in the social realm and directs blame on affluent women for the social isolation of rich and poor. She is particularly blunt in the parallel passage in “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall,” an address to the Chicago Woman’s Club. This absence of democracy, Addams charges, “is even more mortifying when we remember that social matters have always been largely under the control of women.”[42] Because women historically have carried principal responsibility for sustaining social connections, they now bear responsibility to bring democracy into the realm of social affairs. Her examples support her claim. Even though African Americans and immigrants have the political franchise, in the crowded city they live in “a practical social ostracism” and the well-to-do “feel no duty to invite [them] to [their] houses.” The wealthy woman who invites only her social equals to her parties is “as unscrupulous in her use of power” as the corrupt city bosses who buy and sell votes.[43] Women, Addams claims, must be primary actors in bringing democracy into the social realm.

Here, Addams leaps across the divide between public and private that is integral to the Enlightenment conception of political and economic liberalism. For classical liberals, women and the home belong to the private sphere, outside the domain of public and political affairs. At that time women lacked political rights to vote, run for public office, or serve on juries, and they faced legal and cultural barriers to entering business and professional life. Much of the nineteenth-century movement for women’s rights was dedicated to removing barriers to women’s full participation as citizens. Addams was well aware of these restrictions and would devote a significant measure of her political activism to women’s full inclusion in public and political affairs. Yet in “Subjective Necessity” Addams ignores these restrictions and directly asserts that the duties of democratic citizenship include decisions about socializing within one’s home.

Addams’s story of the evolution of democracy is very different from the one usually told in the United States. That story tells how political rights were extended over time from property-holding white men, first to all white men (1830), then to African American men (1870), and finally to women (1920). In that story, the meaning of political rights, as articulated in the Declaration of Independence, remains the same, firmly grounded in the Enlightenment conception of eternal, abstract, moral rights to life and liberty as natural endowments of all humans. By contrast, Addams is claiming that the very meaning of democracy itself evolves historically, from an initial political phase to subsequent phases encompassing industrial and social affairs. When Addams claims that American democracy is partial, she is not referring to the fact that political rights had not yet been extended to all citizens. She is making the larger claim that the conception of democracy embodied in the Declaration of Independence is itself partial. The very meaning of democracy needs to be conceptualized anew to meet the challenges of the era caused by industrialization, urbanization, and the global movement of peoples. In just a few words Addams has located herself in the intellectual discourse that places democracy within evolutionary time, its meaning a matter of ongoing evolution and readaptation.

Addams would state her critique of the Enlightenment vision of political and economic liberalism more fully in later writings, but her rejection is evident at the beginning. Addams does not give arguments for why democracy should pervade social relations. She does not even hint that the public-private distinction is a hurdle to cross. Enlightenment thinkers had the solitary individual at the center of their vision. With the social organism at the center, one’s reasoning flows out differently. If the social organism is to be healthy during the phases of democratic evolution, then all parts of the organism, including home and social relations, must be included. A democratic social organism can attain healthy equilibrium only if democratic relations flow through every aspect of its structure and functioning.

Addams’s belief that rich and poor need to be interconnected for the social organism to be in healthy equilibrium also informs her discussions of why educated young people are attracted to settlement life. To express why educated, affluent young people feel drawn to work with the poor, Addams closely paraphrases Mazzini when she writes, “They feel a fatal want of harmony between their theory and their lives,”[44] She adds, “Our consciences are becoming tender in regard to the lack of democracy in social affairs.” Educated young people in particular experience “universal brotherhood” as a sentiment.[45] Their sentiments and the signals from their consciences are indicators that democracy is in the process of evolving from the political phase and into the social.

Addams’s syntax may seem awkward, but attending to it closely reveals the nuances of her thinking. She claims to be speaking for “educated young people [who] are seeking an outlet for that sentiment of universal brotherhood which the best spirit of our times is forcing from an emotion into a motive.”[46] The “best spirit of our times” refers to democracy’s historical movement from the political to the social sphere. Educated young people experience this historical movement both as an intellectual appreciation of humanity’s kinship and as a feeling of personal discomfort. In “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall” Addams gives a clue on how to turn idea and emotion into action when she writes, “We need the thrust in the side, the lateral pressure which comes from living next door to poverty, to make even our humanitarianism of highest avail.”[47] The motive for action comes from direct engagement with particular others, as one becomes bound by ties of sympathy with their cares and needs. A settlement provides a setting in which such engagement can be sustained.

“The Impulse to Share the Race Life”

The second line of motives for establishing social settlements includes “the impulse to share the race life” and to bring “social energy and the accumulation of civilization” to those who have little.[48] This motive “to share the race life” is “primordial,” Addams notes. “Our very organism holds memories and glimpses of that long life of our ancestors which still goes on among so many of our contemporaries.”[49] In an 1887 speech to Rockford College, Addams was even more clear: “We are taught subtile theories of heredity that our very nerve centres and muscular fibers have inherited tendencies, predispositions for benevolence.”[50]

In this section of “Subjective Necessity” Addams juxtaposes evolutionary science with literature, a pattern she would continue to develop throughout her lifetime. Addams’s interests in the sciences were long-standing. During her college years, she read Darwin’s Origin of Species and The Descent of Man. As one of the founders of the Rockford Female Seminary Scientific Association, she read Popular Science Monthly, with its many articles on evolution.[51] Essays by Herbert Spencer appeared in virtually every issue. Addams begins the section by linking references to humans’ evolutionary history with a poem by Wordsworth. Like a storyteller, she moves quickly to a vignette about a young woman alone in the city who longs for sympathetic connections with the strangers who pass her by.

To Addams, these literary images are directly connected to the biological roots of human morality. For Addams to understand morality as emerging through evolutionary processes was not unusual. Darwin, in his account of the evolution of morality in The Descent of Man, writes that humans inherit social and sympathetic instincts from their animal ancestors. Among gregarious species, including humans, acting on social and sympathetic instincts leads to cooperative interactions that have survival value for the species. Darwin approves Spencer’s account that moral intuitions and emotions issue from social and sympathetic instincts and function as a kind of organic memory of the experiences of countless generations.[52] Addams calls organic memory “the striving of inherited powers” and notes that it urges us to act on behalf of others.[53]

To repress these urges, to stay away from opportunities to help others, Addams comments, “deadens the sympathies.” Spencer, in comparing “militant” or antagonistic societies, with “industrial” or cooperative ones, points out how acting antagonistically toward others has “a brutalizing effect on the feelings.” By contrast, “allowing the sympathies free play” fosters altruism and related moral virtues.[54] Addams personalizes these biologically based urges, writing, “We have all had longings for a fuller life which should include the use of these faculties.” She immediately gives these longings a literary dress by placing them alongside Romantic poet William Wordsworth’s well-known ode “Intimations of Immortality.” Wordsworth’s image of children retaining impressions of their souls’ experiences before birth, Addams writes, finds its “physical complement” in organic memory’s encoding of humans’ long evolutionary struggle to survive.[55]

Addams uses these scientific analyses and literary images to diagnose dissatisfactions and illnesses that accompanied affluence, a concern widely shared at the time.[56] For affluent young people, Addams observes, education develops their intellectual capacities but leaves them emotionally unfulfilled. Their lack of vitality is physiological as well as psychological. Addams cites English biologist Thomas Henry Huxley’s contention that feeling useless is a severe shock to the system that can result in its atrophy.[57] In an analogous passage in “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall,” Addams refers to the advice that experts, including Cambridge University physiology professor Michael Foster, gave to Canon Samuel Barnett when he established Toynbee Hall. These experts told Barnett that educated young men need “a practical outlet . . . for all this feeling.”[58] To this advice from scientists, in “Subjective Necessity” Addams adds a literary reference from The Children of Gibeon, by popular English novelist and social reformer Walter Besant. He had described the young people’s longing as a “sense of humanity” that is “fuller and wider” than “philanthropy [or] benevolence.”[59] Darwin had made a similar comment when he remarked that the idea of humanity arises as sympathies become more tender and diffuse.[60] Taken together, these perspectives make clear why working in a settlement provides the practical outlet these young people need. Not only does it keep mind and body busily engaged; it also fulfills the biologically based urgings to respond to this sense of humanity.

Addams’s peculiar phrase about how “the best spirit of our times” is forcing “the sentiment of universal brotherhood . . . from an emotion into a motive” gains clarity when placed within the evolutionary psychology of the day. As psychologists turned their discipline from Lockean introspection to evolutionary biology, William James’s recently published Principles of Psychology quickly became a primary text. James reviews humans’ large repertoire of primitive instincts and proposes that emotions arise as instincts are activated. Perceptions of events trigger instinctive responses, which then give rise to emotions. This is the meaning of James’s statement that “we feel sorry because we cry, angry because we strike, afraid because we tremble,” not the other way around.[61] James considers sympathy a primitive instinct and recommends that those wanting a fuller account consult Thomas Fowler’s The Principles of Morals.[62]

As sympathy plays such a large role in Addams’s conception of ethics, examining Fowler’s account will help to fill out that conception by making explicit the biological and psychological mechanisms Addams’s language presupposed. Fowler agrees with Darwin on the origins of sympathy and its role in human social evolution.[63] He writes, “In a complete act of sympathy, then, there are three stages, the mental representation of the circumstances, the emotional act of fellow-feeling or sympathy, properly so called . . . and lastly, the disposition to render assistance, if possible, to the object sympathised with.”[64] Fowler’s first stage, “the mental representation of the circumstances,” indicates the context for the second stage of feeling sympathy toward others. “Sympathy,” he writes, “implies the power of imagining, or setting before the mind, the circumstances which excite those joys or sorrows in the person with whom the sympathy is felt. Hence, every act of sympathy implies a certain amount of intelligence, and caeteris paribus, the more vivid the power of imagination, the more keen is the feeling of sympathy.”[65] For Fowler, intelligence encompasses more than the ability to construct rational arguments. It also includes the ability to vividly imagine the circumstances of others.

Fowler’s third stage, “the disposition to render assistance,” can help in deciphering Addams’s seemingly odd wording about forcing a sentiment from an emotion into a motive. She uses a similar construction in a 1901 essay, where she writes that a young woman on leaving college “must be able to constantly extract from the situation itself a motive power to feed her energy and to give her zeal.”[66] In the late nineteenth century, “motive” and “motive-power” were frequently used to designate energy sources such as wind, water, and electricity.[67] Addams’s use of “motive-power” is in keeping with evolutionary psychology, that instincts provide the motive power for action.[68] It is face-to-face interactions that triggered the social instincts, leading to cooperative behavior and mutual assistance. Victorian evolutionists did not see instinct and reason as opposing forces. Instead, they placed them in evolutionary sequence. Reason, a more recent evolutionary acquisition, can channel the instincts and balance them but lacks the strength to activate them or to oppose them directly.[69] Knowledge of people’s needs, ideals of humanity’s unity, and the desire to be benevolent are not powerful enough to motivate action. But when sympathetic instincts are activated in the presence of human need, then knowledge and the will become able to direct these instincts into helpful activity.

Fowler’s account of how sympathy functions provides an evolutionary basis for one of Addams’s favorite expressions: to create channels through which the moral impulse can flow.[70] The moral impulse is the sympathetic instinct, and it is the job of intelligence, honed by vivid imagining, to create channels through which the sympathetic instinct can be translated into fruitful activity. For settlement workers, living among the poor as neighbors not only makes vivid imaging possible, it also activates sympathetic instincts so they can function as motive power. Sympathetic instincts alone cannot heal the social organism, but when such instincts are activated by neighborly dwelling and channeled by intelligence’s vivid imagining, pathways toward healing can be found.

“A Certain Renaissance of Christianity”

Addams identifies “a certain renaissance of Christianity,” then taking place, as the third line of motives for settlement work.[71] With this phrase Addams puts her rhetorical skills to good use as she addresses multiple audiences simultaneously, including adherents of various forms of liberal Christianity, followers of Comtean positivism, and members of the Society for Ethical Culture. Scholars today generally interpret this phrase as referring to the work of liberal Protestants and other social Christians who set aside theological questions and stressed love and service to others as the Christian message.[72] Historian Rima Lunin Schultz highlights this portion of “Subjective Necessity” in an article naming Addams the “Apotheosis of Social Christianity.” Schultz claims that Addams conceived of the work of Hull House as an embodiment of Christian humanism, an expression of Christ’s spirit.[73] Jean Bethke Elshtain writes that “Subjective Necessity” “displays the American social gospel movement at its most attractive.”[74] Louise W. Knight also gives special attention to this third line of motives, discussing connections Addams made between Christianity, Tolstoyan nonviolence, and democracy.[75] Schultz and Knight document how Addams collaborated with many people and institutions in the social gospel and social Christianity movements.[76] Close examination of the text, however, reveals that in “Subjective Necessity,” Addams’s primary sources for this renaissance were people strongly influenced by Comtean positivism, for whom religion had an evolutionary history and had become scientific, that is, naturalized and rationalized.[77] The positivists removed religion from the supernatural sphere and gave it a scientific basis, centered on humanity rather than on a transcendent deity.

Addams’s immediate and unnamed source is English essayist Walter Pater’s novel, Marius the Epicurean. Pater’s description of the early church matches Addams’s, emphasizing love of all humanity, cheerful service, and sympathy for all.[78] The novel is set during the so-called minor peace of the Antonine emperors. Pater calls this time a “renaissance,” as the early church incorporated elements of pagan culture into its rituals and outlook, just as the later Italian renaissance incorporated Greek and Roman elements into Christianity.[79] Addams virtually quotes Pater’s description of Jesus as “the Good Shepherd, serene, blithe and debonair, beyond the gentlest shepherd of Greek mythology.”[80] Pater’s description of the early church parallels his contemporaries’ image of a healthy social organism. The church, Pater writes, exhibited “the ideal of culture . . . as a harmonious development of all the parts of human nature, in just proportion to each other.”[81] Pater compares this early renaissance with the present time, as Christianity evolved into humanism.[82] Addams agrees, identifying Christianity with “a deep enthusiasm for humanity, which regarded man as at once the organ and object of revelation.” This is the Christianity, Addams claims, a naturalized, nondoctrinal humanitarianism, which many young people, including settlement workers, are seeking to express in the social realm.[83]

Positivists maintained that immortality is not a matter of the soul’s eternal existence in a transcendent realm but is achieved through the influence one has on others. Addams expresses this idea using the same sentence in both “Subjective Necessity” and “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall.” She writes, “The very religious fervor of man can be turned into love for his race and his desire for a future life into [being] content to live in the echo of his deeds.”[84] In “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall” Addams attributes the sentence to English novelist George Eliot and attaches to it the claim “This is what George Eliot passionately voices.”[85] Addams may have had in mind Eliot’s poem that begins, “O may I join the choir invisible / Of those immortal dead who live again / In minds made better by their presence.” Eliot believed that religion, although it is no more than a projection of human ideals and feelings, can still be a valuable source of sympathy and community cohesion.[86] In England the poem was widely regarded as the clearest expression of Comte’s Religion of Humanity.[87]

In “Subjective Necessity” Addams attributes the same statement to Frederic Harrison.[88] Harrison was the leader of the Comtean positivists in England. He took Comte’s idea of understanding society scientifically, filtered it through an evolutionary lens, and defined history as “the continuous biography of the evolution of the human race.”[89] Addams’s biographer and nephew, James Weber Linn, reports that in 1888, at the time of her initial visit to Toynbee Hall, Addams met with Harrison to discuss the positivist’s Religion of Humanity.[90] Positivists were attacked as atheists; Harrison maintained that positivism represented “the rational development of Christianity,” as positivists transposed a transcendent God into humanity itself, dwelling in its earthly home.[91]

Further evidence that Addams was working with ideas from Harrison in “Subjective Necessity” is in the particular way she compares the settlement to a chorus of a thousand voices singing Handel’s “Hallelujah Chorus,” an image commentators have found particularly striking.[92] In The Meaning of History, Harrison compares the cumulative advance of history to “one of those noble choruses of Handel.” After beginning quietly, additional voices join in “until the whole stream of song swells into one vast tide of harmony, . . . wave upon wave in majestic exultation and power.”[93] Addams adapts Harrison’s analogy by substituting the social settlement for history’s advance.[94]

Addams found in positivism the same message that she took to be fundamental to Christianity, that is, the love for and dedication to all of humanity.[95] Addams’s conception of Christianity’s renaissance in this section is not that of social Christianity, the social gospel, or Christian humanism in any straightforward sense. It could be that this essay reflects the midpoint in Addams’s movement from a more religious to a more secular understanding of humanism.[96] On those other occasions during the 1890s when she inserts Christian language to talk about democracy, she pivots quickly into the more secular language of social service and social reform.[97] Democracy and Social Ethics contains very little religious language, and she rarely used it after that.

Addams’s language in this section of “Subjective Necessity,” in addition to appealing to both social Christians and Comtean positivists, also maps onto the philosophy of the Society for Ethical Culture, the sponsor of the summer school. Henry Carter Adams appeals to both social Christians and Comtean positivists in his introduction to the week’s lectures. He states that the conception of democracy as “a social ideal, a purpose, a feeling,” is shared by “the theorist who asserts for God a common fatherhood” and “the humanist who asserts for man a common brotherhood.”[98] There were dense links between early English and American social settlements and ethical culture societies. In 1886, three years before Addams opened Hull House, Stanton Coit founded the Neighborhood Guild, an early form of social settlement, in New York City. He subsequently moved to London to become the head of the London Society for Ethical Culture.[99] William Salter, head of the Chicago Society for Ethical Culture, promised “unqualified support” to Addams’s plans for establishing Hull House. Addams spoke frequently at meetings of ethical culture societies throughout the country.[100]

Felix Adler, founder of the Society for Ethical Culture, had trained to be a rabbi of Reform Judaism. The society’s earliest supporters were primarily Jews who questioned their religion’s rituals and theological beliefs, while appreciating the emphasis in Jewish ethics on moral righteousness and social justice.[101] Adler defined the purpose of the society as advancing the moral ideal of humanity independent of religion and improving ethics as moral practice, a stance that aligns well with Comtean positivism.[102] The society welcomed members of any creed but took no position itself on theological or philosophical belief systems. “Righteousness” and “fellowship” were key concepts, “Deed before Creed” its motto.[103] Adler thought ethics should be derived scientifically from experience, through observation and testing, and not from a metaphysical conception of ultimate reality. Adler himself thought of “God” as a name for a moral ideal. “God” does not refer to a transcendent being but is a way of expressing the supreme moral worth of each person on earth.[104] Adler voiced the same interpretation of immortality as Eliot and Harrison, as expressing how a person’s influence lives on in the lives of others.[105]

In 1884 Beatrice Webb wrote in her diary, “Social questions are the vital questions of today: they have taken the place of religion.”[106] Theorists active in social reform drew variably on Hegelian idealism, Comtean sociology, British socialism, liberal Protestantism, Reform Judaism, and other bodies of thought. Mutual influences ran deep, and there was considerable overlap in how these theorists and reformers charted the direction social reform should take. Most took evolutionary ideas in science seriously and integrated them into their theoretical orientations. Their rhetoric overlapped extensively. This makes it particularly difficult to determine which theoretical positions Addams most closely identified with in the 1890s. Addams knew personally and worked closely with people in every camp. Like Adler, she wanted to promote alliances for social reform without allowing creedal differences to become barriers to conjoint action.

Addams concludes “Subjective Necessity” writing, “The subjective necessity for Social Settlements is identical with that necessity which urges us on toward social and individual salvation.”[107] By using the term “necessity,” Addams places personal subjective experience inside larger evolutionary forces working within the social organism. For social progress to occur, individuals need to be responsive to these forces. The “motive-power” for working with these elemental forces comes not from reason alone, not from an act of will, nor from some sense of benevolent noblesse oblige or universalized sense of love, but from continuing interactions with those struggling against starvation. Sympathetic instincts need to be engaged in concrete situations to create solidarity across class lines. The philosophy that underscores this solidarity is one “which will not waver when the [human] race happens to be represented by a drunken woman or an idiot boy.”[108] Here, Addams’s dated vocabulary echoes Wordsworth’s familiar poem “The Idiot Boy,” about a woman’s devotion to her mentally disabled son. Creating this solidarity is precisely what social settlements set out to do.

Addams ties sympathy and science together in describing the settlement as “an experimental effort . . . [that] should demand from its residents a scientific patience in the accumulation of facts and the steady holding of their sympathies as one of the best instruments for that accumulation.”[109] Robert Woods, head resident at Boston’s South End Settlement, made this point directly in his address to the summer school audience. He stressed how settlement residents need to know their neighbors intimately, adding, “Now this searching investigation can never be made by the mere canvasser or statistician. It comes only by long and loving acquaintance. Science and sympathy must unite if we are to have any living knowledge of the poor.”[110] Sociologist Franklin H. Giddings made a similar claim, telling the audience, “Contact and converse being the conditions of progress, its phases are an increase of material well-being, an inclusive sympathy, a catholic rationality, and a flexible constitution.”[111] Addams’s rhetoric was more complex than that of other speakers at the summer school, but they shared the belief that sympathy was more than a relational capacity. It was also a methodological tool of scientific investigation.

*

This analysis of “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements” brings to light the patterns of reasoning and forms of rhetoric Addams would employ throughout the 1890s in her ethical deliberations on specific social problems. The image that orients her thought is that of a healthy social organism. This stands in contrast to the image of the martyr as moral exemplar, with its call for self-denial and performance of self-sacrificing duty for the sake of others. Addams is interested in the health of each cell and of the interconnective processes through which the health of the whole is sustained.

Addams uses theories of evolution in biology, in conjunction with evolutionary psychology, to articulate the intimate connections among body, emotions, and intelligence within each person. These can only be sustained through the equally intimate, organic processes circulating through the entire society. Addams uses these to diagnose the cause of psychological distress among educated young people and to prescribe direct, active engagement with the poor. This would simultaneously restore these young people to psychological health and bring the poor into fellowship with the whole community. Working with and going beyond the theorizing of Mazzini and Toynbee, Addams argues that given the urban, industrialized setting of the late nineteenth century, relations among people must be democratic rather than feudal in character.

Addams’s analysis is stitched together through the penumbras of her key terms. “Motives” arise from humans’ most basic biological instincts. “Sympathy” is one of these instincts. “Emotion” carries power from instincts to action. “Imagination” is one vital component of intelligence, as it works with reason to channel this stream of physiological and psychological processes toward activity that can heal social divisions as well as the self. “Democracy” names the processes that lead to social health.

To convey all of this content, Addams employed principles of late nineteenth-century rhetoric, using literary devices to elicit sympathetic responses from her audience. She also employed figures of speech that could appeal simultaneously to three different audiences, in this case, social Christians, Comtean positivists, and members of ethical societies. While these groups did not share creedal beliefs, their orientations could all be described as humanistic. They were committed to working for the common good and did not demand purity of belief among those willing to collaborate with them. Much credit, though, for Addams’s success in navigating among these audiences lies in the extent to which they all participated within the vocabulary of social evolutionary discourse.

Thus, in her earliest reflections as a social reformer, Addams worked at the intellectual center of the era’s scientific investigations. She drew on evolutionary theorizing from many disciplines, including biology, economics, sociology, psychology, and religion, and infused these scientific findings with literary imagination to create texts of depth and beauty.

Chapter 2

An Evolutionary Method of Ethical Deliberation

Virtually every issue Addams confronted in her early years at Hull House was singed by industry’s brutal treatment of its workers. Her task in her 1895 essay “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement” was to ascertain what role the settlement should play in response to labor struggles. After a brief discussion of the circumstances that prompted Addams to write the essay, this chapter uses the musical image of theme and variations as discussed in the introduction to show how Addams created her method of ethical deliberation. The geographical and historical dimensions or axes of the situation function as the theme, and the particular features of Addams’s analysis in this essay make it her method’s first variation, or iteration. Here Addams uses the geographical habitat of the city and the evolutionary history of the era’s labor problems as the theme. She begins the analysis by selecting customary practices of the labor movement and the settlement movement as ethical guidelines and interprets them through the lenses of the two axes. In this variation Addams emphasizes how in ethical deliberation one must be responsive to the particularities of a given situation and maintain an attitude of self-distrust throughout the process. The chapter concludes by comparing dimensions of Darwin’s, Eliot’s, and Addams’s thinking, thus demonstrating the close affinity among late nineteenth-century scientific, literary, and ethical imaginations that Addams’s deliberations presupposed.

Addams never articulated her method in general terms, nor did she point out that the theme is constituted by geographical and historical axes. Her method and theme, however, can be identified by examining the essay closely and placing Addams’s statements within evolutionary perspectives and literary practices prevalent in the late nineteenth century. The two axes lie at the heart of evolutionary reasoning and give evidence that Addams’s method of ethical deliberation is fundamentally evolutionary in character. Addams analyzes the labor situation the way scientists approach ecological habitats, by studying how organisms coexist in the habitat and tracing the history that led up to the habitat’s current configuration. Just as a scientist examines a biological habitat at a given time, so Addams examines the situation’s geographical habitat, paying meticulous attention to the effects of industrial exploitation and the workers’ efforts to respond. After studying labor’s evolutionary history, Addams takes note of the direction in which historical trends are moving. This is what scientists do when they use a habitat’s evolutionary history to hypothesize about its possible future. Just as scientists exercise caution to keep enthusiasm from clouding their judgment, so Addams recommends an attitude of self-distrust throughout the process of deliberation.

“The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement”

When Addams moved into Hull House in 1889, the labor movement’s efforts to organize workers were well under way in Chicago. The late nineteenth century was a “Gilded Age,” a time of industrial consolidation that brought enormous profits to the so-called robber barons. Workers organized and protested; employers pushed back, sometimes with brutal force. During the 1880s the Knights of Labor became the dominant labor organization in Chicago, as it welcomed both skilled and unskilled laborers from all industries. In 1886, with the Chicago stockyards strike and Haymarket Square riot, its strength waned. The American Federation of Labor under Samuel Gompers incorporated in 1886 and brought skilled craft unions under one organizational umbrella.[1] Economic recessions in the 1870s and early 1890s intensified workers’ suffering and complicated union organizing efforts. Hull House became involved on labor’s behalf, hosting meetings and collecting funds. Mary Kenney, a skilled bookbinder, and Alzina Stevens, a printer, organized women’s unions at Hull House. Some, including the Dorcas Federal Labor Union, the Laundry Employes’ (sic) Union, and the Chicago Working Women’s Council met regularly at Hull House. Ellen Gates Starr marched in picket lines.[2] Addams lobbied and gave speeches. Her 1894 speech to the Congress on Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration, along with her analysis of the Pullman strike, elevated her as a national leader in industrial reform.[3]

When Florence Kelley arrived at Hull House in late 1891, she was already an experienced labor organizer, published author, and committed socialist.[4] Kelley’s fierce energy contrasted with Addams’s deliberative calm, yet their sharp differences in modes of thought and action proved complementary. When Paul Kellogg, editor of Charities, asked Addams to review Kelley’s book Some Ethical Gains through Legislation, Addams replied, “Reviewing Mrs. Kelley’s book is almost like reviewing a book of my own, so closely do I feel identified with her undertakings and with her ideas.”[5] Under the auspices of Illinois’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, Kelley investigated over a thousand sweatshops in Chicago. She drafted the Illinois Factory and Inspection Act, which was passed by the Illinois legislature in 1893. Governor John Peter Altgeld appointed Kelley as chief factory inspector to ensure the law was enforced.[6]

Kelley’s investigative findings formed the basis for Hull-House Maps and Papers. Published in 1895 and authored by “the Residents of Hull-House,” it was one of the first detailed, empirical social surveys in the United States. Its maps pinpointed precisely where immigrants from different national groups lived within the one-third square mile of the Hull House neighborhood and indicated how much they earned.[7] Kelley’s essay, “The Sweating-System,” documented the forms and degree of industrial exploitation sweatshop workers suffered.[8] Other essays discussed child wage earners; Jewish, Bohemian, and Italian immigrants in Chicago; charity organizations; and the need for artistry in labor.

Addams’s contribution to the volume, “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement,” is a reflective rather than an empirical investigation. The essay is densely textured; interpretive threads are tightly woven with stories of her neighbors’ experiences. This weaving comes to typify Addams’s writing. Readers should not regard her stories merely as illustrations of more general points. They are literary creations in their own right and should be read as such. They sometimes signal geographical and historical dimensions of the social problem under consideration and function as evidence for and steps in her argument.

The Situation’s Geographical Habitat

“Propinquity,” Addams notes, “is an unceasing factor in [the settlement’s] existence.”[9] Just as an ecologist dwells with a specific habitat, making carefully detailed observations, so living in the neighborhood gave Addams access to fine-grained data needed for ethical reflection. In the first paragraph Addams selects two general ideas to guide her deliberations. The first reflects how the settlement movement used the idea of neighborliness to express the residents’ approach to their work.[10] In an 1896 essay, “The Object of Social Settlements,” Addams describes the various activities of a settlement as outward manifestations of its primary aim, which is to be a member of the neighborhood. The “soul” of the settlement, Addams declares, is its “neighborhood point of view.”[11] In “The Settlement as a Factor” Addams interprets neighborliness in terms of living in an impoverished neighborhood and fostering relations of “fraternal cooperation” with the neighbors. Residents should not impose their own vision for community improvement but work with initiatives already adopted by the neighbors or ones the neighbors would like to undertake. The second guiding idea is captured in the well-known labor slogan of the Knights of Labor and adopted by the American Federation of Labor: “The injury to one is the concern of all.”[12] Just what should count as relevant injuries and who was to be included in “all” were not yet determined.

Figure 2. Mass meeting at Hull House, 1895. Hull House made its facilities available to a number of unions for organizing and for regularly scheduled meetings. HHC_0055_0695_004, Hull House Collection, Special Collections & University Archives, Courtesy of the University of Illinois at Chicago Library.

These guiding ideas are not ethical principles or rules in any traditional sense. Addams regards them through an evolutionary lens. They are essentially customary practices captured in slogans that indicate how industrial workers and settlement residents understand their work and what their aims are. They are unfinished in the sense that their full scope and content have not yet been determined. They are in the process of evolving, and they gain content as they are used in specific situations. To the extent that people in the situation can guide subsequent events, they can shape what these guiding ideas come to mean.

Propinquity gives settlement residents a vantage point from which to study their neighborhood with a microscopic lens. They know intimately the devastating impact of the industrial system on their neighbors. These injuries are elemental and life threatening: insufficient food and inadequate shelter. Addams tells of an Italian widow who worked seventeen hours a day sewing piecework. She earned only enough to feed and clothe her children, but not to cover rent or fuel costs.[13] Propinquity also makes it abundantly clear to settlement residents that their neighbors need to organize to seek redress. The general slogan, “The injury to one is the concern of all,” was being given content through the growth of the union movement. Addams observed directly how union participation improved her neighbors’ living conditions. Without union membership, individual pieceworkers labored in isolation and competed against each another to sew the greatest number of garments. The consequence was that wages for all in the trade were constantly lowered.[14]

Addams describes the effects of isolation on industrial workers, noting, “In industrial affairs isolation is a social crime; for it there tends to extermination. This process of extermination entails starvation and suffering, and the desperate moral disintegration which inevitably follows in their train.”[15] Her strong language sets her observations within the evolutionary discourse of the day. Humans are gregarious animals; like wolves and horses they herd together for protection. For members of a gregarious species, it is life threatening to be isolated from one’s peers. In Degeneration (1880), British zoologist Edwin Ray Lankester writes that degeneration leading to extinction occurs when “the organism becomes adapted to less varied and complex conditions of life.”[16] Addams saw directly how workers’ isolation from each other was maladapted to the “varied and complex conditions” of contemporary industrial life.

Because of propinquity, Addams was keenly aware of the challenges union organizers faced. To create a union organizers needed to do more than appeal to workers’ social standing as members of the working class. Addams gives the example of male members of the cloakmakers union, who found themselves being replaced by nonunionized women whom employers could hire more cheaply. Overcoming the men’s gendered attitudes had its prosaic aspects. To bring women into the union, the cloakmakers needed a place to meet. The women workers would not join the men at their regular meetings over the saloon, as Addams tells it, because of their own qualms and those of their families. The men and women workers accepted Hull House’s offer to meet there, but even Hull House was not seen as a neutral space for reasons beyond gender. The men were Russian Jewish tailors and suspected that Hull House “was a spy in the service of the capitalists.”[17] The young women were Irish Americans who identified more closely with middle-class Hull House residents than with their male cloakmaking counterparts. Addams notes that the two groups were divided by “strong racial differences, by language, by nationality, by religion, by mode of life, by every possible distinction,” differences Addams thought were of “a deeper gulf” than class differences.[18] Union organizing served as a conduit for them to cooperate across these many identity markers. Addams’s example demonstrates how the economic and social dimensions of life are deeply intermixed. It also shows how Addams regarded class differences as just one aspect of identity among many others. One might say that settlement residents recognized intersectionality and multiple identities long before these terms entered the academic vocabulary.

Addams states that because of propinquity, the labor movement’s slogan that “injury to one is the concern of all” carries in it “the driving force of a conviction,” one that “entails a social obligation.” Because of the relationships settlement residents had established with their neighbors, propinquity to the suffering caused by industrial conditions creates ethical obligations to respond. It imposes on settlement residents a weighty responsibility to find ways to engage in the labor struggle. The settlement residents’ own credibility was at stake; participation in the labor movement was a “test of their sincerity.”[19]

While settlement residents share the life of the poor by living among them, Addams observes, they do not share the insecurities that wage workers suffer. This makes the obligations entailed by the two ethical guidelines fall differently on residents than on workers. This is evident in Addams’s comments about women insisting on doing piecework so they could care for their families, even though this had the effect of lowering wages for other workers. Considered in the abstract, Addams writes, these women should extend the care and affection they had for their own children to all the children of the community.[20] But Addams would not call on them to do so. For workers like them, the struggle for bare, material existence inevitably obscures larger moral considerations. Because Addams and the residents do not face this struggle, they could take “a larger and steadier view.” This makes it incumbent on them to keep the union movement “to its best ideal,” an obligation that falls more heavily on them than on the workers.[21]

Several features of Addams’s analysis of the geographical axis place her method in strong contrast to more traditional methods of ethical deliberation. The ethical guidelines Addams identifies for this specific case are not analogous to the ethical principles found in traditional ethical theories. These guidelines do not exist in some ahistorical, universal form, such as natural law or divine command, as a dictate of pure reason or a general conception of happiness derived from human nature’s essential features. Instead, they emerge from within specifically located moral disturbances and change over time as the situation evolves and human interventions take place. Also they are not universally applicable, as is Kant’s categorical imperative to treat all rational beings as ends in themselves, or the utilitarian’s obligation to perform the same calculation for each person affected. Addams’s ethical guidelines apply differentially. They fall more heavily on some people than on others, depending on the particular features of the given situation. Finally, unlike Adam Smith, who asks ethical deliberators to remove themselves from the situation at hand and assume the stance of an outside, impartial spectator, in Addams’s method the one deliberating remains intimately involved. The particular angle of vision gained through personal engagement in the situation is not only germane but essential to carrying out ethical deliberations at all.

The Moral Situation’s Evolutionary History

To explain what she means by “a larger and steadier view” and by the labor movement’s “best ideal,” Addams places her analysis of current labor strife within a historical trajectory leading from past to present and notes its trends into the future. She defines this trajectory in terms of the phased evolution of democracy, as she had in “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements.” By delineating the historical axis this way, Addams will be able to see from this “larger and steadier view” that industrial conditions affect everyone throughout the social organism. Thus the labor movement needs to be defined broadly and not restricted to trade union organizing alone. The “best ideal” of the labor movement takes the “all” in its slogan, “The injury to one is the concern of all,” and extends it beyond the working class to include all members of the community.[22]

To reach these realizations, Addams again finds inspiration in the writings of Mazzini and Toynbee, drawing insights from passages beyond those she had used in “Subjective Necessity.” Here Addams engages in a call and response pattern with passages from Toynbee and Mazzini. Their lines illuminate hers. Eighteenth-century revolutionaries had demanded the franchise, Addams states, “not only as a holy right” but, adapting Mazzini’s language, “as a means of entrance into the sunshine of liberty and equality.”[23] However, this “irresistible impulse” for the vote carried a darker implication. Mazzini thought individual rights were essentially egoistic, mere “fragments of democracy.”[24] Addams borrows Mazzini’s image that to pursue rights in themselves is to “have torn the great and beautiful ensign of Democracy” and to parade around carrying only its ragged fragments.[25] Calling Mazzini “the inspired prophet of the political democracy,” she names Toynbee the “prophet of the second development” and notes his description of industrial workers responding to the “impulse to come out into the sunshine of Prosperity.”[26] Addams summarizes Toynbee’s invocation of Mazzini’s vision of democracy as a fuller union, to which liberty and rights are but means in the service of fulfilling duties to the whole.[27]

For Toynbee, Mazzini, and Addams, this is the relationship that should hold between rights and duties. To them, rights and duties are not correlative terms. Ethical duties encompass more than respecting the rights of others. One’s ethical duties also include responsibilities for the healthy functioning of the whole community. Addams incorporates this conception of duty in her statement that the ultimate aim of the labor movement must be “the communion of universal fellowship.” This phrase parallels Toynbee’s call for workers and employers as “participators in the life of mankind, and joint-heirs of the world’s inheritance” to enter into “a wider communion.”[28] Addams, with Toynbee and Mazzini, sees the labor movement as a step toward a wider justice and fellowship and not solely as advocating for workers’ rights and well-being.

Addams’s vision of the labor movement as a step toward universal fellowship contrasts with that of union supporters who regarded unions as a working-class weapon with which to resist capitalists’ entrenched power. Addams writes, “A movement cannot be carried on by negating other acts; it must have a positive force, a driving and self-sustaining motive-power.”[29] The phrase “self-sustaining motive-power” was an engineering term, found in patent applications for motors in which the energy source is internal and self-renewing.[30] This notion parallels how life energy is generated internally in biological organisms. For both workers and employers, Addams claims, this energy source is “the irresistible force of human progress.”[31] The goal of the labor movement should be social unity between employers and employees, not social divisiveness. Today, after a century of capitalist consolidation, Addams’s vision may sound naïve. At the time, however, corporate capitalism was just emerging as a dominant economic pattern, and Addams’s language about “the irresistible force of human progress” was not unusual.[32]

Addams dismisses both laissez-faire capitalist and Marxist responses to the labor movement. In the essay Addams summarizes each position succinctly and notes that not only capitalists but also some in the labor movement advocated an individualist, laissez-faire position. These workers maintained that if all corporate privileges were removed, individual workers could bargain with their employers from a position of relative equality.[33] At the other extreme, Marxist socialists praised antagonistic struggle between capitalists and the proletariat as the path toward achieving a classless society.[34] Addams criticizes the individualist creed for lacking fellowship and the Marxist creed for advocating a limited solidarity based on class antagonism. Neither position lends itself to evolutionary analysis. Because people and life processes in the social organism are deeply interdependent, laissez-faire and Marxist approaches yield false readings of economic distress. Given that the social organism lay at the center of most intellectuals’ vision at the time, this was a reasonable position to take.

Addams considers it dangerous to foster oppositional stances between capitalists and workers. Worried that historical progress could be reversed, she writes that a society divided along class lines with its “tendency to warfare” is undeveloped and, in this respect, primitive rather than civilized.[35] Addams explains, “The settlement believes that just as men deprived of comradeship by circumstances or law go back to the brutality from which they came, so any class or set of men deprived of the companionship of the whole, become correspondingly decivilized and crippled. No part of society can afford to get along without the others.”[36] Addams would soon write “A Modern Tragedy,” her analysis of the Pullman strike, where she describes how George Pullman had become “decivilized and crippled” by staying away from his striking workers and holding them in contempt.[37] In both “The Settlement as a Factor” and “A Modern Tragedy” Addams uses the discourse of social evolutionary theorizing to redefine the evolutionary trajectory from primitive to civilized that many of her contemporaries used to measure advancement. Unlike many of them, Addams does not consider material achievement to be the prime indicator of social progress. Instead, progress should be measured by movement toward the association of all in a spirit of universal fellowship. Progress is not inevitable; human actions can lead to civilization’s regression rather than its advancement.

Referring only to “a recent writer,” Addams reinforces her belief in history’s potential movement toward universal fellowship with a reference to Irish sociologist Benjamin Kidd’s Social Evolution. Addams predicts that class divisions will be undermined, in Kidd’s words, by “the immense fund of altruistic feeling with which society has become equipped.”[38] Kidd supplied empirical evidence to support this claim. He pointed out how the whole globe had become an organism with its “nervous system of five million miles of telegraph wire” and its “arterial system of railways and ocean steamships.” Humanitarian movements flowed quickly through these circulatory pathways as they aimed to end slavery, animal cruelty, and vivisection and promote women’s suffrage and vegetarianism.[39] This “immense fund of altruistic feelings,” Kidd claims, will provide “the motive force” to bridge the gulf between the powerful and the powerless.[40]

Here it may be more prudent to interpret Addams’s invocation of Kidd as a rhetorical insertion suited to the moment rather than as a clue to her theoretical or methodological moves. Kidd’s book was widely read, frequently quoted, and translated into many languages, including Chinese and Arabic.[41] Kidd visited Hull House and debated socialist Victor Berger there.[42] Addams uses Kidd’s phrase about the “immense fund of altruistic feeling” to stand for a more general idea expressed in other forms by Darwin, Spencer, and others, namely that human evolution is accompanied by the growth of sympathy and altruism.[43] While Addams and Kidd were both evolutionary thinkers, differences between their views are striking. Unlike Addams, Kidd maintains that antagonism between the individual and the social organism is inherent. He assigns a major role to competition in furthering progress and proclaims the superiority of the Anglo-Saxon race.[44] Because Kidd’s phrase had been widely reproduced in the press, audience members could identify the sentiment it expressed without being familiar with Kidd’s theories.

Addams’s employment of the historical axis shows how thoroughly evolutionary her method is. Her method stands in strong contrast to classical liberalism and to stage development theories such as Marxism. Progress, for classical liberals, is achieved through adherence to eternal, universal, and hence static natural laws. In the political arena, these laws govern relations and institutions established by social contract among autonomous rights holders. In economic relations, the dictates of the laws of supply and demand are carried out through laissez-faire capitalism. While progress takes place in history, the paradigm is ahistorical because the conceptions of persons and of natural laws do not change. Stage development theorists such as Marx are more historically attuned, but their basic premises are nonevolutionary. For Marx, progress takes place through various configurations of economic power and powerlessness. After passing through a number of developmental stages, the end result to be achieved is a classless society. Once the paradigm is understood, the end result can be reliably predicted.

In contrast to both liberalism and stage development theories, evolutionary theories posit that an end result cannot be predicted; what happens within a habitat at a given point in time can profoundly change the path history will take. Addams occasionally quoted English historian and political theorist John Morley’s statement that “evolution is not a force, but a process.”[45] Directional changes can be triggered by contingent, nonpredictable events, be they random biological mutations or serendipitous human interventions. When Addams calls for the union movement to aim toward “the communion of universal fellowship,” this aim is not analogous to a Marxist vision of a classless society or to a perfectly liberal society in which natural laws of social contract and supply and demand are perfectly observed. Nor is Addams’s ideal a mere utopian hope. It is scientifically based, as science was then understood, on trends that emerged through evolutionary processes, now exhibited in the present geographical habitat. Evidence for this is articulated in the labor movement’s own slogan, “The injury to one is the concern of all.”

At any given moment within a single habitat, many evolutionary trends are present. In the 1890s, these included the trend toward consolidation of corporate capitalism’s power and the diminution of trade unions’ influence. However, to criticize Addams for not selecting the trend that became reality in the United States over the course of the twentieth century is to misinterpret the task she had undertaken. Addams was not positioning herself as an outside, impartial spectator making predictions on how the future of the labor movement would turn out. She was not in the business of making risk assessments. Instead, Addams was asking how best to bring her community back to social health. “The communion of universal fellowship” expresses what health for her community could look like if appropriate measures are taken. It is an ideal projection but a realistic one because it is based on existing, verifiable trends. It is also a temporary ideal in the sense that if history evolves along other trend lines, the ideal will need to be reconceived. Addams’s task was to devise a method for dealing with the pressing ethical dislocations of her time. It was not to foresee and select the most likely path that historical contingencies might take.

Thus, by using the two axes of analysis, Addams’s demonstrates how the situation’s geographical habitat and its evolutionary history converge in the current situation. Her detailed study of the neighborhood enables her to identify ethical guiding ideas with which to begin the analysis and to expand their content. By placing the current moment within the history of democracy’s evolution, Addams is able to align movement toward social democracy in her neighborhood with similar signs of evolutionary growth in the national and international arenas. The settlement’s role in furthering evolutionary progress is thus to support union activities insofar as they lead toward increasing people’s ethical sensitivities toward unity with all members of the social organism. Evolutionary growth toward universal fellowship is the “best ideal” that should guide the settlement’s participation in the labor movement.[46] This ideal is not utopian but emerges from the trajectory of the habitat’s evolutionary history.

Through this analysis Addams refines her initial question regarding the responsibility of the settlement to the labor movement. Given that settlement workers have sympathetic ties with and ongoing commitments to their neighbors, and given that working people had already initiated labor unions in response to their situation, how can settlement residents work with unions to help them realize their “best ideal”? How could the union movement’s slogan, “The injury to one is the concern of all,” be given the content of embracing workers and employers alike? Addams gives a general formula for responding to these questions: watch for the point where “the movement [turns] from a development into a [class] struggle.”[47] This is the point where the self-interests of the working class become the aim of organizing, rather than regarding such efforts as partial steps toward universal fellowship. After this point, further efforts to unify the working class would result in hardened class divisions, making it even more difficult to attain a fuller unity that includes employers. Addams concludes that after this point of turning takes place, the settlement could no longer be of service.[48] It might help unions make material gains, but at the cost of further cementing class divisions.

Ethical Deliberation and Self-Distrust

It is risky to predict the course of future events, yet planning for future action requires that some such predictions be made. In this variation of her method, Addams needs to project when development toward universal fellowship will turn into a class struggle. She also needs to anticipate when strikes and other organizing tactics will strengthen antagonism rather than create sympathy and fellowship across class lines. Making these predictions is difficult, even with the knowledge propinquity provides. For Addams, an attitude of self-distrust needs to accompany moral reflection and experimentation.[49] She agrees with her fellow pragmatists that doubt is an integral feature of reflective thinking. Scientific inquiry begins with doubt, Charles Sanders Peirce declares; it initiates and fuels the scientific enterprise.[50] Addams’s notion that self-distrust should pervade moral deliberation turns the scientist’s need for doubt inward and squeezes it into the interstices of every step of the process.

The wider frame for Addams’s appeal to self-distrust was the prevalence of doubt as a theme in the Victorian era. The early nineteenth century was an intensely religious time; by century’s end in Britain, and to a lesser extent in the United States, doubt had become an underlying quality of thought, not only in religion but in all arenas of intellectual thought, including science and literature.[51] Tennyson’s In Memoriam, completed in midcentury, explores the intricacies of faith as webbed with doubt. These lines capture the mood: “There lives more faith in honest doubt, / Believe me, than in half the creeds.”[52] For some Victorians, doubt signaled movement toward religious disbelief. Others, however, sought to cultivate an “ethics of doubt.” For them, doubt was an integral component of inquiry, with both intellectual and moral dimensions.[53]

Addams’s advocacy of self-distrust parallels that of scientists’ quest for “objectivity,” as understood at the time. In “The Image of Objectivity,” historians of science Lorraine Daston and Peter Galison write that these scientists were not seeking “the viewpoint of angels,” or one free from human perspective, with which to carry out their investigations. Rather, their quest for objectivity was a moral one, more akin to “the self-discipline of saints.”[54] From midcentury on, scientists began to doubt the veracity of their observations of the natural world, as they confronted the fact that earlier representations drawn by naturalists of plants, birds, and body parts were in fact abstractions, idealizations, or “archetypes.” Goethe, for example, was explicit that this was the way natural specimens should be represented, with the imperfections smoothed out.[55] In response, these scientists gave a moral justification for using mechanical recording devices such as photographs, X-rays, and photoengravings. These devices functioned as a form of self-discipline, or “self-surveillance” by keeping scientists from imposing their own preferences, theories, or interpretations on the data they sought to obtain.[56] French physiologist Claude Bernard’s description of the scientific ethic was representative of the era: “Humility and self-restraint, the one imposed from without and the other from within, thus define the pride-breaking morality of the scientists.”[57]

This broadens the context for understanding Addams’s appeal to sympathy. To her, sympathy is not a subjective emotion that needs to be reined in by self-distrust but a primary instinct to be called on and guided. Sympathy is a necessary conduit to the perceptions and facts needed for deliberation. Thus its function is methodological. Self-distrust guards against letting perceptions of a situation or assertions of will lead one’s judgment astray. It channels sympathy toward those responses that are more trustworthy, more widely embracive.

In Addams’s solo lines about self-distrust, George Eliot takes the dominant lines in the chorus. Literary scholar Lance St. John Butler characterizes Eliot as “a literary example of doubt in action.”[58] Several of Addams’s lines echo passages from Eliot’s novel The Mill on the Floss. As a young woman, Addams had read George Eliot’s novels intensely. Her college notebooks contain many extended quotations from them. Quotations from Eliot, at times fragmented and unmarked, appear in many of Addams’s later writings.[59] In her novels Eliot explores how people come to have moral knowledge through “a good deal of hard experience” and the “bruises and gashes” of everyday life.[60] Eliot, like Addams, stresses how sympathy creates crucial bonds among people as they encounter one another in the messy, concrete situations of life. In an 1856 essay Eliot writes,

The greatest benefit we owe to the artist, whether painter, poet, or novelist, is the extension of our sympathies. Appeals founded on generalizations and statistics require a sympathy ready-made, a moral sentiment already in activity; but a picture of human life such as a great artist can give, surprises even the trivial and the selfish into that attention to what is apart from themselves, which may be called the raw material of moral sentiment.[61]

For Eliot, if her novels enable her readers to increase their moral sensibilities and extend their sympathies to others, she will have done her work well. It is helpful to read the stories Addams inserts into her writings as serving the same novelistic function. More than illustrations for general points, they are literary interpolations meant to quicken sympathies and reveal moral truths.

Addams makes only a brief reference to Eliot in “The Settlement as a Factor,” but her analysis of why it is difficult to identify when a development toward universal fellowship devolves into a class struggle reveals how much Eliot enriched her thinking. Addams notes that right and wrong are often hard to untangle, adding, “Right does not dazzle our eyes with its radiant shining, but has to be found by exerting patience, discrimination, and impartiality.”[62] This phrase, “patience, discrimination, and impartiality,” comes from a passage in Eliot’s Mill on the Floss where the narrator explains why moral rules are incomplete guides to moral decision making. Eliot as narrator observes, “Moral judgments must remain false and hollow unless they are checked and enlightened by a perpetual reference to the special circumstances that mark the individual lot.” She goes on to note how life is too complex to be captured by moral maxims. Justice cannot be found “by a ready-made, patent method, without the trouble of exerting patience, discrimination, impartiality, without any care to assure themselves whether they have the insight that comes from . . . a life vivid and intense enough to have created a wide, fellow feeling with all that is human.”[63]

From her own stance of having created “a wide, fellow feeling” with her working-class neighbors, Addams repeatedly follows Eliot’s advice to attend to “the special circumstances that mark the individual lot,” precisely what propinquity reveals. Every habitat, biological or moral, is shaped by its own peculiarities. Knowing this keeps ethicists modest. It demonstrates how there are no shortcuts in ethical deliberation. One cannot simply paste a general ethical principle onto a particular case and declare the analysis finished. Many adjustments in ethical reasoning must be made in response to features idiosyncratic to the particular situation. For example, Addams knew that women doing piecework, lumber shovers loading and unloading heavy timber, and workers who could find work only seasonally lived perilously close to the edge.[64] She knew that to ask them to act for the good of the whole was asking too much. This illustrates how moral rules are bounded by “the special circumstance that mark the individual lot.” The rule Addams articulates, to watch for the point where development turns away universal fellowship and becomes class struggle, is not one that those needing union protection the most should be asked to follow. It is a rule only for those in the “special circumstance” of sharing Addams’s “individual lot” as someone for whom life’s basic necessities are secured.

The difficulty of identifying the point of turning is compounded by the fact that in some instances the same action that expands the scope of fellowship among workers may simultaneously reinforce class polarization. This happened during the Pullman strike. Addams describes how she watched “the Chicago unions of Russian-Jewish cloakmakers, German compositors, and Bohemian and Polish butchers” join in the sympathy strike.[65] Which pulled these workers more strongly? By cooperating across national differences, were the workers making a step toward universal fellowship, or were they consolidating oppositional lines against the capitalist class? At this point in the strike, it is impossible to say whether this should count as a “development” or a “struggle.” The answer will depend in significant measure on what happens later. A clear application of Addams’s admonition to watch for the point of turning is impossible. This is not a deficiency in her method of ethical deliberation but a clear-sighted realization of the ambiguities and unpredictability inherent in morally troubling situations.

Addams notes that some English unions and the local Woman’s Cloakmakers’ Union exhibit a spirit of altruism, indicative of expansive fellowship, and detects that other unions had had “glimpses” of this.[66] It is difficult for settlement residents to judge just when such glimpses are strong enough to keep union difficulties from turning into class struggles. One cannot base judgments on appearance alone. Because workers are strongly motivated by grievances, Addams observes, union actions at times appear “erratic and ill-timed.”[67] She excerpts lines from poet James Russell Lowell’s “Ode to France” to describe workers’ appearance at labor meetings, “Groping for the right, with horny, calloused hands / And staring round for God with bloodshot eyes.”[68] Transposing the evolutionary perspective into a process of maturation, Addams notes that the labor movement is still young, its sense of grievance still strong. Its insistence on class divisions is due to “the primitive state of the labor movement,” because it assumes that issues can be resolved through fighting. To think that matters cut cleanly into right and wrong is a “childish conception of life.”[69] In an unmarked virtual quotation from Eliot, Addams writes, “The path we all like when we first set out in our youth is the path of martyrdom and endurance, where the palm branches grow; but that later we learn to take the steep highway of tolerance, just allowance and self-blame, where there are no leafy honors to be gathered and worn.”[70] In their youth, unions may have only their own self-interest in mind. Addams hopes that as they mature, they may come to enlarge their vision to include workers and capitalists alike.

Addams proposes that for those with perceptions and training, the proper attitude toward moral deliberation is not increased confidence in one’s ability to make moral judgments but a mixture of trust and distrust. Self-distrust in one’s ability to read a situation correctly or choose the right path is a sign of moral maturity. Borrowing an unattributed description from Toynbee, Addams comments, “We must learn to trust our democracy, giant-like and threatening as it may appear in its uncouth strength and untried applications.”[71] In trusting democracy, Addams trusts that this moment is within history’s progress toward democracy. She trusts that unions will mature and come to include capitalists in their embrace. The best one can do is hold onto a morally mature distrust of one’s own judgment and, with sympathy and perception, attend to “special circumstances” the best one can.

*

Addams’s method of ethical deliberation was itself a line in a larger chorus of evolutionary ethicists. That Addams’s method is thoroughly evolutionary becomes even more apparent when it is set next to Darwin’s account of the evolution of ethics. Darwin, like Addams in her discussion of motives for establishing social settlements, traces morality back to the social instincts. Darwin wanted to give a purely evolutionary account of the moral sense, which he considered “the most noble” of all human attributes.[72] He was well prepared to write his chapter on morality in The Descent of Man; his background reading included the ethical writings of Adam Smith, David Hume, Immanuel Kant, John Stuart Mill, Alexander Bain, Harriet Martineau, and others.[73] In broad outline, Darwin maintains that human morality is rooted in the social and sympathetic instincts. Species in which social instincts have evolved exhibit, for example, the ability to herd together for protection and to take pleasure in each other’s company. These capacities have survival value. Darwin does not think that the moral sense is exclusive to humans. He points to dogs’ capacities for obedience, self-control, and faithfulness as evidence that they “possess something very like a conscience.”[74] Darwin considers it likely that “any animal whatever, endowed with well-marked social instincts, would inevitably acquire a moral sense or conscience, as soon as its intellectual powers had become as well developed, or nearly as well developed, as in man.”[75] As cognitive capacities evolved in Homo sapiens, humans became able to assess their actions in light of past consequences and anticipate future results. They used these abilities to sort through conflicts between social and nonsocial instincts.[76] Social instincts are most powerfully evoked in face-to-face encounters, that is, in propinquity. Through repeated encounters, habits of sociability develop. These habits, plus pressure from group expectations, enable people to gain some measure of control over purely egoistic impulses and keep them from becoming too destructive.

That Addams begins her deliberation with customary practices and slogans also accords with Darwin’s account of the evolution of moral rules. Darwin writes that because of social and sympathetic instincts, humans have an innate desire to help others, but instincts alone do not tell how to render aid. Reason can play a role by helping customs to evolve into moral rules.[77] These rules are not fixed. The actions people perform shape how moral rules continue to evolve. This explains why Addams thought carefully about how the customary practices she selected as guiding ideas could be strengthened, extended, and given more specified content.

Addams’s concern that the labor movement increase its scope to include workers and employers alike also aligns with Darwin’s account. Darwin writes that people and groups who are less civilized and thus lower on the evolutionary scale are less able to control their selfish and vengeful impulses. Their social instincts have not been sufficiently channeled into habits and encoded in social customs. Those who consider themselves highly civilized, however, should not become complaisant about their ethical achievements. Darwin observes, “Man has emerged from a state of barbarism within a comparatively recent period.”[78] The ethics of those who consider themselves highly civilized are not secure. This insecurity is reflected in Addams’s concern to find the point where development toward universal fellowship turns instead toward class struggle. While evolutionary thinkers of the day accepted that evolution generally moved in a progressive direction, they debated whether history’s progressive impulse was sturdily reliable or vulnerable to reversal.[79] Addams agrees with Darwin that, in the evolution of morality, “Progress is no invariable rule.”[80] That Addams thought evolutionary progress could be reversed is clear in her worry that fellowship among workers could become exclusionary.

Addams was also in good company in worrying about the increased antagonism generated by class struggle. Darwin in Descent of Man states that to “check our sympathy,” even with good reason, results in “deterioration in the noblest part of our nature.”[81] British Fabian socialists, whose writings Addams would use to frame her next essays, link social evolutionary progress with a gradual decline in class struggle.[82] For these theorists, as for Addams, courses of action that limited sympathy’s expansion have a degenerative effect and hindered social progress. If workers base their actions on the self-interest of their own class alone, this will provoke antagonism that would harm the entire social organism, including the workers themselves.

Addams’s identification of the union movement’s “best ideal” with a “communion of universal fellowship” accords not only with Toynbee’s and Kidd’s thinking but also with Darwin’s, as he links human evolutionary progress with the expansion of sympathy and altruism. Darwin writes that among early tribes the sympathetic instincts and habits extended only to members of the same tribe.[83] As civilization advances, social, economic, and political boundaries extend, and sympathies extend with them. Darwin writes, “The very idea of humanity . . . seems to arise incidentally from our sympathies becoming more tender and more widely diffused, until they are extended to all sentient beings.”[84] As Addams reflects on the role of settlements in the labor movement, she sees that much more is at stake than working conditions and wages. Also at issue is whether civilization will move in a progressive or regressive direction.

Addams asks rhetorically, “Is it possible to make the slow appeal to the nobler fibre in men, and to connect it with that tradition of what is just and right?”[85] Her question assumes an evolutionary perspective on moral growth.[86] The “nobler fibre” is sympathy, issuing from social instincts. Traditions of what is just and right represent deeply established social habits. These need to be retained in some form but adjusted to fit the social organism’s new industrial configuration. Addams’s call for a “slow appeal” reflects a Darwinian understanding of how long it takes for variations to work their way from an individual organism and into the species as a whole.[87]

Addams’s method of ethical deliberation is also a line in a larger chorus of nineteenth-century writers with literary sensibilities. Addams’s use of Eliot’s fiction does not make her method any less scientific and evolutionary. In fact, it strengthens the case. In her analysis of the labor movement Addams skillfully exploits affinities that held between science and literature in the late nineteenth century.[88] At that time science and literature often shared vocabulary and methods. Leading scientists published in the Atlantic Monthly as well as in Popular Science Monthly, which was widely read by scientists and nonscientists alike.[89] To educated readers, scientific texts and literary works were both accessible.[90] Clarifying these affinities provides the deeper context for understanding Addams’s reasoning in “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement” as well as in subsequent writings.

In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries many significant literary figures, such as Goethe in Germany, Wordsworth and Coleridge in England, and Thoreau in the United States, were also dedicated naturalists. They rejected Descartes’s view of nature as a machine and instead perceived nature as a living, organic whole. Unlike a machine, nature’s various elements cannot be understood apart from their place and functioning within a larger whole. Intricately webbed, they pulsate with life. Naturalist Alexander von Humboldt was a pivotal figure linking art and science. He and Goethe conducted scientific experiments together; Wordsworth, Coleridge, and Thoreau immersed themselves in Humboldt’s writings.[91] Humboldt took the idea of nature as an organism and infused it with exacting measurements and observations of the natural world. His perception alternated between a microscopic focus on the smallest details to a macroscopic vision of their interconnections.[92]

Darwin’s lens of perception also shifted between minute details and the interwoven patterns that run through the whole of nature. Historian and philosopher Robert Richards identifies Humboldt as one of the “romantic biologists” who believed that scientists and artists apprehended nature in much the same way. According to Humboldt, it is the aesthetic capacity that enables scientists to apprehend form and relations among natural objects.[93] Humboldt’s narrative of his five-year transcontinental scientific explorations accompanied Darwin on his five-year voyage on the Beagle. Richards notes that Darwin annotated the volume assiduously and wrote in his journal that Humboldt “like another Sun illumines everything I behold.” Richards comments, “[Darwin’s] very experience passed through the lens provided by Humboldt.”[94] Darwin’s perceptions of nature’s intricacies were tuned by his aesthetic apprehension of nature.

In incorporating passages from George Eliot into her evolutionary method, Addams may have sensed how Eliot’s novels reflected her extensive knowledge of philosophy and science. Before writing novels, Eliot had edited the Westminster Review and had translated Spinoza, David Strauss, and Feuerbach into English.[95] For nearly twenty-five years Eliot lived and worked closely with philosopher and scientist George Henry Lewes. Like many Victorians, they enjoyed collecting natural specimens; Lewes’s scientific explorations are reflected in Eliot’s novels.[96] Eliot’s extensive knowledge of scientific methods penetrated deep. Literary scholar Sally Shuttleworth observes that Eliot’s narratives comprised “an active dialogue with contemporary scientific thought.”[97] Taken chronologically, Eliot’s novels track the changing conceptions of biology from natural history to evolutionary science. Her first novel, Adam Bede, presents village life as natural history. It was published in 1859, just months before Origin of Species appeared in print.[98] In her last novel, Daniel Deronda (1876), Eliot’s approach is more experimental. The narrative is more fragmented, its movement more dynamic.[99] Eliot called her novels “experiments in life,” much as Addams called the settlement an “experimental effort.”[100]

Darwin also employed narrative structures in his writings. Literary scholar Gillian Beer intends the title of her book Darwin’s Plots to refer both to the narratives Darwin acquired from his culture and the new ones he generated. Darwin’s writings are full of literary tropes, metaphors, and analogies.[101] For example, he arranges the species into a “tree of life” and proposes that “community of descent” is the “hidden bond” among organisms.[102] The image of the web was ubiquitous in nineteenth-century scientific and literary works and is particularly important in the writings of Darwin and Eliot. Darwin writes of the “inextricable web of affinities” that connects members of a given class of organisms.[103] The concluding paragraph of Origin of Species gives the image of the “entangled bank,” a lively place “clothed” with plants, birds, insects, worms and more, each dependent on the others.[104] In Middlemarch Eliot explores the entangled bank that constitutes her characters’ habitat and the webs of affinity that constitute their lives.[105] Addams and other social theorists envisioned society as similarly webbed, its members inextricably entangled. Addams’s example of the meeting between Russian Jewish and Irish American cloakmakers illustrates how their identities as workers were entangled within a wide range of religious, linguistic, gendered, and nationalist practices. If, as Darwin notes, the “merest trifle” can upset the balance of a given habitat, one can understand Addams’s worry about labor unrest leading to increased antagonism.[106]

There are commonalities in the modes of perception Eliot, Darwin, and Addams brought to their investigations. Two are particularly salient: the meticulous attention they give to the inhabitants of the habitat and their use of synthetic imagination in constructing their narratives. In a review of John Ruskin for the Westminster Review, Eliot penned words that apply just as well to how she, Darwin, and Addams attended to the habitats at hand. “The truth of infinite value [Ruskin] teaches is realism—the doctrine that all truth and beauty are to be attained by a humble and faithful study of nature.”[107]

Eliot, who has been called “the chief practitioner of Anglo-American realism,” knew her characters intimately. Writing about common people leading prosaic lives, Eliot depicts her characters’ complexities in detail. She explores their loves and antipathies, their kindness and its limits, their egoism and their capacity for sympathetic connection with others. Eliot does not idealize her characters. She claims that only a realistic portrayal would engage readers’ sympathies and stretch their tolerance and affection toward the common people who constitute so much of humanity.[108] Eliot’s sympathetic appreciation for her characters is an essential attribute of her realism, and it anchors her belief in literature’s power to elicit sympathy in its readers.

That Darwin had vast knowledge of nature’s details is beyond dispute. That he had a keenly aesthetic eye becomes apparent with a cursory glance through Origin of Species. In the first paragraph of the chapter titled “The Struggle for Existence,” Darwin asks how all of nature’s “exquisite adaptations” could have come about. As evidence he notes:

We see these beautiful co-adaptations most plainly in the woodpecker and the mistletoe; and only a little less plainly in the humblest parasite which clings to the hairs of a quadruped or feathers of a bird; in the structure of the beetle which dives through the water; in the plumed seed which is wafted by the gentlest breeze; in short, we see beautiful adaptations everywhere and in every part of the organic world.[109]

Darwin carries this same aesthetic lens to his acknowledgment that life’s continuity depends on its continued destruction. He prefaces this observation with the comment, “We behold the face of nature bright with gladness.” He continues by noting that he intends “struggle for existence” in “a large and metaphorical sense.”[110] These and other passages are shot through with the sensibility of a poet.

Like Eliot with her characters and Darwin with his biological organisms, Addams through continuous interactions with her neighbors came to know their habits, hopes, fears, and idiosyncratic quirks. She delighted in coming to know them. The sympathetic connections she formed with them were conduits through which she gained access to the smallest details of their lives. Addams, like Eliot, does not pretend her observations are unfiltered. Eliot admits that the mirror of her mind could be distorted; nevertheless, she determined to speak as truly as if under oath.[111] Addams acknowledges that settlement residents cannot know from the inside what their neighbors experience because they know they will be fed when hungry and cared for when old.[112] Nonetheless, Addams, like Eliot and Darwin, gives to her habitat as much clear-eyed, meticulous, and appreciative scrutiny as she can. As evolutionary thinkers, Darwin’s, Eliot’s, and Addams’s appreciative approaches to their relevant habitats enhanced rather than detracted from their realism.

Eliot, Darwin, and Addams all employed “synthetic imagination” as conceived by the Romantic poets. For many nineteenth-century thinkers, imagination was the synthetic power by which the bonds that give order and significance to empirical observations are ascertained. Coleridge writes of imagination as a power suitable for apprehending unity within and among organic forms, whether natural or poetic. Scientists and poets do not merely take disparate elements and assemble them mechanically. Instead, imagination constructs a narrative. A plant begins as a seed, already an organic whole. It grows by a principle from within, transmuting sunlight and nutrients into its ever-changing self. Its various parts live and grow through constant integration and interdependence within its habitat. To understand nature, Coleridge writes, one must use imagination to go inside the process of growth and apprehend its narrative pattern.[113]

For Eliot, synthetic imagination functions at multiple levels. Literary scholar Moira Gatens writes that Eliot chose to present her thinking through novels rather than philosophical works so that the reader would engage intellect, emotions, and imagination as a holistic process.[114] Inside the novels the narrator’s voice reveals aspects of the characters’ complexities that are hidden from overt observation. This enables imaginative readers to approach even the most flawed characters with sympathy.[115] Inside the story, characters struggle to find organic coherence within themselves and in their communities, and they use synthetic imagination to do so. In The Mill on the Floss, the novel Addams quotes in “The Settlement as a Factor” and the first published after Origin of Species appeared, this vision of organic coherence is severely tested. External economic forces disrupt the village’s pastoral history. Maggie Tulliver is entangled in this turmoil, as she is pulled in contrary directions by threads of duty, love, impulsive desire, and the drive for self-fulfillment. Maggie searches for ways to weave these threads into organic coherence, a task for synthetic imagination.[116]

Darwin acknowledges there are many gaps in the evolutionary story, and he uses synthetic imagination to fill them. Gillian Beer observes, “Evolutionary theory is first a form of imaginative history. It cannot be experimentally demonstrated sufficiently in any present moment.”[117] Detailed observations lack significance until the “hidden bonds” linking them together are uncovered. Repeatedly, Darwin acknowledges that our ignorance is profound. Many species now extinct left no trace.[118] Natural selection, he writes, works “silently and insensibly.” Humans cannot watch its process but only detect its work after “the hand of time has marked the long lapse of ages.” When intermediary linkages in the fossil record cannot be found, Darwin admits, scientists “will have to trust almost entirely to analogy.”[119] Only a strong synthetic imagination could devise as elegant a theory as descent through natural selection. Only such an imagination, working closely with an enormous number of finely detailed observations, could conclude with confidence that “from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.”[120]

Darwin used synthetic imagination to detect the hidden bonds that create communities of descent among natural organisms; Addams sought to create communities of ascent among human organisms by forging webs of affiliation. In “The Settlement as a Factor” Addams stretches her synthetic powers across several domains to construct her evolutionary narrative. She synthesizes sociological data from surveys with intimate knowledge of her neighbors acquired by fostering sympathetic relationships that gave her entrance into their inner lives. She brings the preevolutionary writings of political revolutionary Mazzini into coherence with economist Toynbee’s evolutionary history of the Industrial Revolution. From Eliot’s literary fiction Addams adopts an attitude of self-distrust that matches the attitude scientists must take toward their work. Addams’s observation that in ethics “right and wrong are most confusedly mixed” echoes Darwin’s claim that clear demarcations between species cannot be made but are to an extent arbitrary.[121] In the writings of Eliot, Darwin, and Addams, resonances abound.

In writing about her method of ethical deliberation, Addams, like Eliot, wanted to foster sympathetic understanding in her readers. She was particularly concerned about attitudes toward recent immigrants whom members of wealthier classes considered culturally, morally, and cognitively inferior to themselves. Addams crafted a method of ethical deliberation that could foster such sympathy. She does not rail against prejudice and injustice but writes so as to shape her readers’ perceptions, channeling them toward a more sympathetic apprehension of those they feared. Today’s readers, accustomed by discipline or temperament to oppositional stances that call out injustice directly, should not interpret Addams’s rhetoric as indicating a lack of awareness or concern about injustice. Addams wrote so as to encourage her readers to take the slow, evolutionary steps that would make for solid progress toward a harmonious and healthy equilibrium in the social organism.

Those acquainted with John Dewey’s ethical writings will detect affinities between Addams’s method and Dewey’s pragmatist ethics. Addams’s central points of analysis in “The Settlement as a Factor” match the ones Dewey incorporates into his ethics. Like Addams, Dewey begins ethical deliberation with a morally problematic situation rather than with abstract ethical principles. For both, because persons are embedded within social relations, they deliberate as participants and agents in the situation and not as objective, external observers.[122] Judgment must be exercised to determine which moral rules are applicable to the situation. In their general form, these rules lack specificity and need to be shaped using data from fine-grained observations made in direct experience.[123] For Dewey as for Addams, this pattern of deliberation is not a formula that guarantees the “right” answer; uncertainty cannot be eliminated.[124]

Dewey’s decade in Chicago was crucial in shaping his thinking about ethics. He arrived in Chicago in July 1894, at the height of the Pullman strike. He visited Hull House often, gave talks there, and served as a trustee. He became friendly enough with Addams that he named a daughter after her; Addams gave a loving and poignant eulogy for Dewey’s son, Gordon, who died in 1904.[125] When Addams published “The Settlement as a Factor” in 1895, Dewey was working his way out of Hegelian idealism and had not yet adopted pragmatism.[126] Historian Robert Westbrook points to Dewey’s Ethics, published thirteen years after Addams’s essay, as evidence that Dewey had replaced his earlier, idealist-based ethics with a naturalized, experimentally based one, in which the moral situation lies at the center of his theory of moral action.[127] Through Dewey’s close association with Addams in the 1890s, he no doubt noticed the pattern of her reasoning and the power of her method. It may well be that Dewey in large measure designed his method in light of what he had learned from hers.

Chapter 3

From Feudalism to Association

Like other social scientists of his era, English theorist Graham Wallas tried to update his own field of political science by integrating the findings of evolutionary psychology into it. In May 1915 after hearing Addams speak in London, Wallas included in his thank-you note, “I have learnt more from you (e.g., how to be psychological without being cynical) than from any other writer.”[1] Wallas was right to appreciate Addams’s acumen at psychological analysis. In the three essays examined in this chapter, “A Belated Industry,” “A Modern Tragedy,” and “The College Woman and the Family Claim,” Addams focuses on three pairs of relationships, that of a mistress and her live-in domestic servant, of industrialist George Pullman and his workers, and of affluent parents and their educated young adult daughter. Addams later revised these essays as chapters in Democracy and Social Ethics titled “Household Adjustment,” “Industrial Amelioration,” and “Filial Relations.”

Although their topics are widely disparate—domestic service, labor strikes, tensions within affluent families—what unifies these essays is how Addams stretches the historical axis of her analyses back to the feudal era and defines the intervening history as a yet incomplete process of evolution out of feudalism and into the present era of association. In “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement” Addams’s historical axis began with the eighteenth-century political revolutions for political and economic rights. To examine the morally troubling situations in these three essays, however, Addams needed a deeper history. By going back to the feudal era, Addams is able to identify how the relationships she examines are structured by hierarchical patterns that cause social disequilibrium in the present. She pays particular attention to the psychological costs experienced by those within such feudal relationships. Her conclusion in each essay is that these relationships need to be restructured and brought into alignment with the associative, egalitarian tendencies of the present.

In her speeches and essays Addams generally avoided technical terms of academic disciplines or slipped them in unobtrusively. In the three essays discussed here, Addams’s descriptions of the geographical and historical dimensions of social problems map onto what sociologists called “social statics” and “social dynamics.” Auguste Comte had used these terms to designate the central division of sociology’s subject matter.[2] By the late nineteenth century these terms had been widely adopted by professional sociologists who used them to understand social evolutionary processes. “Social statics” referred to the study of the structures and processes through which the social organism functions at a given point in time. Because the social organism is a living thing, it is never literally static. Theorists reserved “social dynamics” for larger, qualitative changes in the organism’s complexity.[3] The processes of social dynamic change provide the route for social progress.[4]

Sociologists, including Addams, knew that the study of social statics alone was insufficient. They understood their task in terms of identifying social dynamic trends then under way and working with these trends to help the social organism achieve a higher level of equilibrium. How were reformers to know whether social changes then in evidence were normal variations in statical functioning or indications of a change in social dynamics? Frederic Harrison explains how to do this. “Nothing but a thorough knowledge of the social system, based upon a regular study of its growth, can give us the power we require to affect it. For this end we need one thing above all—we need history.”[5] Beatrice Webb, reflecting on her participation in Charles Booth’s monumental survey of London, regretted that the survey was restricted to social statics. She observes, “Only by watching the processes of growth and decay during a period of time, can we understand even the contemporary facts . . . and only by such a comprehension of the past and present processes can we get an insight into the means of change.”[6]

Although Addams had not used these terms in her 1892 lectures at the School of Applied Ethics, her presentations map onto them. Her descriptions of the Hull House neighborhood and urban poverty in “The Objective Value of a Social Settlement” fit the category of social statics. Her claim in “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements” that society is moving from the political phase of democracy and into its economic and social phase belongs to social dynamics. In “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement,” the geographical axis corresponds to social statics, and the historical axis to social dynamics. In the three essays discussed in this chapter, current dislocations in society, as captured by social statics, are due to the fact that social dynamic change from feudalism to democracy has proceeded unevenly and is incomplete.

In these three essays Addams uses variants of “association” to convey the direction of social dynamic movement, such as “associated effort,” “associated life,” and “associated expression.” Toynbee and Mazzini had used “association” as a key term. Toynbee quotes Mazzini’s declaration that “association is the watchword of the future,” which Mazzini defines as “fraternal cooperation of all toward a common aim.” Toynbee clarifies that association “implies a unity of the ethical spirit” that should come to exemplify relations between employers and workers.[7] In two of the three essays examined in this chapter, Addams’s analyses complement those of British Fabian socialists Thomas Kirkup and Sidney Webb, for whom “association” was a key term. Kirkup uses it frequently, writing, “This principle of association is to be the keynote of the social development of the future.” Webb describes socialism as “ordered industrial association.”[8] In “A Modern Tragedy” and “The College Woman and the Family Claim” Addams merges Webb’s and Kirkup’s social evolutionary use of “association” with Mazzini’s image of concentric circles of duty expanding from family to all of humanity. Addams, Kirkup, and Webb pair “association” with democracy, with cooperation as opposed to competition, and with collectivism rather than individualism.[9]

As explained in the introduction, the image of Addams’s essays as her solo voice performing in conjunction with a chorus is helpful for interpreting these essays. In “A Modern Tragedy” and “The College Woman and the Family Claim” the chorus contains a substantial section of British Fabian socialists. Their account of British economic history constitutes a systemic critique of political, economic, and charitable institutional structures. Addams’s voice attends most closely to the psychological dimensions and relational tensions of living at a time of social disequilibrium. Her solo lines contain enough subtle inflections and brief echoes of what the chorus is singing that the words of the chorus can be reconstructed. Thus Addams’s lines complement the Fabians’ critique by filling out the psychological impacts of living within those structures.

Why did Addams write her essays this way instead of laying out the entire musical score? One explanation is that Addams first delivered the essays’ contents as speeches for educated but not scholarly audiences, including people affiliated with women’s clubs and members of ethical culture societies. These citizens were well acquainted with the tensions that characterized domestic service, labor strikes, and affluent families but less familiar with and perhaps less interested in the sociological theorizing implicit in Addams’s remarks. Addams’s words, though, contain enough clues that audience members with facility in the discourse of social evolutionary theorizing could supply the lines being sung by the chorus. This chapter reconstructs the scores of these essays for twenty-first century readers.

“A Belated Industry”

Imagine an audience of relatively affluent women attending a session of the World’s Congress of Representative Women, held in conjunction with the biggest, splashiest world’s fair to date, the World’s Columbian Exposition held in Chicago in 1893. Jane Addams is giving a speech titled “Domestic Service and the Family Claim.” The audience members’ interest is sparked when they realize she is talking about why they have so much trouble holding onto competent domestic servants. They become considerably less comfortable when Addams tells them how overbearing they are in assuming their cooks won’t mind neglecting their own families to serve their employers’ needs. They might have winced when they heard Addams make light of their dedication to their families by saying, “If one chose to be jocose one might say that it becomes almost a religious devotion, in which the cook figures as a burnt offering and the kitchen range as the patriarchal altar.”[10]

This speech was an early version of the next variation of Addams’s method of ethical deliberation, which gives an analysis of the domestic service problem. It was published in 1896 in the American Journal of Sociology under the title “A Belated Industry.” Addams bases her analysis of the problem’s social statics, or its geographical axis, on sociological research that documented the dimensions of domestic service at the time. Addams’s assertion that the ethics of both the mistress and the servant were “tinged with feudalism” hints at the historical axis she uses. In this variation Addams argues that mistresses and servants need to replace their belated feudal ethic with an ethic suited to the approaching era of association and thus play their part in restoring their social habitat to healthy equilibrium. The fundamental moral problem with feudal relationships that persist into the era of association is that they cannot meet humans’ instinctual, biologically based need for fellowship.

Addams’s analysis of domestic service addressed a pressing social concern. Middle-class American women relied heavily on domestic servants, who in the Northeast and Midwest were likely to be young immigrant women. Domestic servants in the South were generally African Americans, whose migration to the North lay a few decades in the future.[11] Women complained they could not find or keep reliable, skilled domestic help; discussions of the “servant problem” dominated popular magazines.[12] Researchers carried out sociological studies on domestic service and household management.[13] Lucy Salmon published Domestic Service, the first book-length sociological study of the issue, which Addams included on the bibliography for lectures she gave at the University of Chicago in 1899.[14] Isabel Eaton, Frances Kellor, Charlotte Perkins Gilman, and Caroline Hunt, all residents of Hull House for various periods of time, contributed to this research.[15] Their goal was to make household management more scientific and efficient.

This research documented that household management was inefficient compared to the production techniques and organization of factory manufacturing. In “A Belated Industry,” Addams illustrates this lag in efficiency by noting that the latest innovation in home cooking was the Rumford range, invented a hundred years earlier.[16] The industry of household management is belated, Addams claims, because “the status of its ethics operat[es] very largely as the determining factor in its industrial situation.”[17] If the ethics of household management, as expressed through the mistress-servant relationship, is making the industry inefficient, then this relationship merits investigation.

Here Addams selects a factor in the geographical axis’s map of the problem, in this case the research community’s concern for industrial inefficiency, as the window through which to shed light on ethical concerns. In asserting that the ethics of the mistress-servant relationship is the primary factor causing household inefficiency, Addams conveys what is at the heart of her conception of ethics. The unit of ethical concern for Addams is not the individual and his or her beliefs, actions, intentions, or virtues. The unit of concern and the focus of Addams’s ethical deliberations are the relationships that hold between and among people.

Addams seeks to pinpoint what is morally problematic in the mistress-servant relationship by comparing factory work with live-in domestic service, the two dominant employment categories for young women. Research at the time showed that in terms of income, food, and housing, live-in domestic servants were no worse, and in some ways were better off, than young women who worked in factories and lived in crowded, unsanitary tenements.[18] Why then, did young women have a decided preference for factory work over domestic service? The biggest reason, researchers found, was that the young women in domestic service felt cut off from their families and social peers.[19] Their loneliness and psychological distress were manifestations of the moral problem lying at the heart of the mistress-servant relationship.

One solution researchers proposed, and one that Addams endorsed, was to develop work contracts that defined servants’ duties and working hours more precisely and permitted them to live where they chose.[20] This would in effect change the relationship of mistress and servant to a more clearly defined contractual one between employer and employee. This change would address the problem of the relationship’s hazy boundaries as the mistress felt free to impose additional responsibilities on the servant and prolong her work hours at will. But that, Addams feared, was a patch that just began to address the full complexity of the moral problem. Note that Addams does not object to the tasks servants are asked to perform. She appreciates women who perform these same tasks out of devotion to their own families. Addams also does not object to affluent women hiring household help from people who live elsewhere.[21] To uncover dimensions of the moral problem, the history of the mistress-servant relationship needs to be explored.

To understand the historical axis of Addams’s analysis, the penumbra of the term “feudal” must be recognized. When Addams calls the mistress-servant relation “feudal,” she is not criticizing the two parties for holding ethical ideas that are musty and old fashioned in some vague sort of way. “Feudal” refers to the historical period of feudalism, and its meaning lies in the economic, political, and familial practices, along with the distinctive pattern of ethical obligations, that defined the age of feudalism. Feudalism’s penumbra of associations included the structure of the feudal household, feudal modes of production, and the character of feudal relations. The feudal household was essentially a small village. In raising and preparing food, building and maintaining barns and housing, and spinning and weaving fabric for clothing, the feudal household was virtually self-sufficient. It contained many servants and artisans in addition to the resident aristocrat’s immediate family. Social status was assigned by birth. Relations were hierarchical and patriarchal, but they were ethical in that they carried reciprocal obligations. Those in positions of power had obligations to protect and care for the well-being of those under their charge. Those of lesser status owed service, obedience, and gratitude in return. The feudal social organism was in equilibrium; the pattern had served Europe for a thousand years.

Here Addams compares the mistress-servant relationship within the habitat of the feudal household with the same relationship as experienced in the late 1890s. This moment on the historical axis follows a centuries-long social dynamic process of moving production and social life out of the extended feudal household and into factories and neighborhoods in which the webs of relationships are largely nonfamilial. That is, the historical trend is from feudalism as a comprehensive mode of social organization toward one organized according to principles of association.

Addams makes a number of comparisons between feudal practices and those of the late nineteenth century. These comparisons function both as an argument by analogy and as an evolutionary argument that runs all along the historical axis. The extended, feudal household, Addams notes, could support servants’ psychological needs, while the modern middle-class household cannot. Within the feudal household, servants worked next to many others who shared their status. In this regard, work within the feudal household resembled modern factory work, as workers are surrounded by their peers. By contrast, domestic servants in Addams’s day were generally separated geographically from each other and from their families and social peers. During the feudal era, economic production centered within a very large household whose members included cobblers, candlemakers, brewers, spinners, and weavers. In the intervening centuries, these craftspeople moved out of the household and performed their tasks as individuals for hire or within manufacturing establishments. In terms of workplace sociability, young women canning peas in factories were more like craftspeople in a feudal household than like the servant shelling peas in her mistress’s private kitchen. The late nineteenth-century mistress-servant relationship was a feudal remnant from which the system of social supports had been removed. The loneliness and isolation servants suffered were not simply opportunity costs to be tolerated, offset by a potentially better paycheck. Of those who made such an argument, Addams comments, “The individual [instinct] instead of the gregarious instinct is appealed to.” The servants’ “dread of social isolation,” she continues, is “wholesome” and “instinctive” and goes against their “gregarious instinct.”[22]

These few remarks point to the core of Addams’s analysis of the mistress-servant problem. In “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements” Addams had named fundamental biological instincts as the underlying impetus for one of the motives for settlement work. In “A Belated Industry” she again returns to the biology of gregarious animals, of which humans are one species. The need for companionship is elemental, grounded in biological instincts whose evolution long preceded the appearance of humans on the earth. Servants in the feudal household were surrounded by others who could meet their needs for companionship, as was also true of young women working in modern factories. Servants in late nineteenth-century households lacked the social supports that fulfilled this basic, instinctual requirement.

Addams reinforces this point with a literary reference that conveys what “an old English poet said five centuries ago.” The poet said, “Forsooth, brothers, fellowship is heaven, and lack of fellowship is hell; fellowship is life and lack of fellowship is death; and the deeds that ye do upon earth, it is for fellowship’s sake that ye do them.”[23] The precise words Addams attributes to this poet, a fourteenth-century English priest encouraging his rebellious peasants, were supplied by the still very much alive English poet and socialist William Morris in “A Dream of John Ball.”[24] Within the poem, “fellowship” rings with the feudal era’s thoroughly religious sensibility. Today, the term still carries a religious tone, the feel of a house of worship, the timbre of coreligionists gathering together. However, when Addams speaks of fellowship, humans’ gregarious instincts lie within the term’s penumbra.

Addams’s concern for fellowship carries into her claim that late nineteenth-century mistresses and servants both hold to a belated feudal ethic. She describes each party carefully to keep the need for fellowship clearly in view. Neither mistress nor servant is necessarily deficient in individual virtue. The mistress is genuinely devoted to her family’s well-being. Aware of her servant’s loneliness, she may even try to befriend her and include her in family activities.[25] The servant may be devoted and hardworking in carrying out her duties. What mistress and servant fail to appreciate is how they cannot stand as discrete individuals detached from the larger social habitat, the one as manager of her own household and the other as an individual employee. What is belated about their ethics is that neither is responsive to the “spirit and tendency” or the “trend of the times.”[26] In serious discussions of social issues “trend of the times” was used to indicate movement away from individual rights and competitive methods and toward using cooperative, democratic methods to achieve social well-being.[27] Addams uses the phrase to refer to social dynamic movement along the historical axis leading from feudalism toward the age of association.

The mistress’s ethics are belated because she fails to place the home within the larger frame of community life. Household management is not simply a question of how food is prepared or rooms cleaned. It is first of all a question of how the family fits “in sharing the corporate life of the community,” that is, how the home is woven into the fabric of interdependencies that make up the social organism. That larger fabric is becoming associative rather than feudal and the mistress needs to adjust her home management practices accordingly.[28] Addams gives no hint that the woman employer might be suffering from the constrictions of the Victorian separate sphere ideal of the middle-class household, one that replicated feudal patriarchal hierarchies. Later, in her speeches on women’s suffrage, Addams would vigorously criticize the ideology of separate spheres and strongly support women’s entrance into every phase of public life.[29] In “A Belated Industry,” however, she restricts her focus to how women manage their households. In doing so, Addams deepens her analysis of the social significance of women’s responsibilities in the home. In addition to whom they invite into their houses, as she stressed in “Subjective Necessity,” women need to bring their household employment practices into alignment with the era of association.

Young women working as live-in domestic servants also failed to apprehend the trend of the times. Addams’s description of them may sound harsh. She concedes that they may be “victims of misfortune and incompetence,” have difficulty learning English, or suffer from timidity, but in any case, they are “dull” and “unprogressive.”[30] Here, Addams is not assessing servants’ individual intelligence or character. The servants are dull in the same sense as those conscientious, hardworking weavers of an earlier time who refused to move from their loom at home into the more efficient factory. Domestic servants are dull in that they lack the vitality that comes from participating in association with their peers. They are unprogressive because they have not “discovered the power to combine” the way factory work prompts workers to organize into unions.[31]

The young women who choose factory work over domestic service are responding to the trend of the times, the tendency of their age. “The brightest girl,” Addams writes, “will follow the natural trend of their times, towards factory work and associated effort.”[32] These young women may not be conscious they are doing so; they may simply want more opportunities for dancing. Addams interprets the young working women’s desire for “a giddy life” as having a deeper significance than merely a longing for urban pleasures. These young women are responding to the times’ new social dynamic, as are their rural male counterparts who escape from farm to the city. Addams writes, “The force which drives them into their share of associated life is just as natural and just as much to be counted upon as the force which drives the wind through the tree tops.”[33] Addams’s observation is consistent with scientists’ understanding of the role of the emotions in prompting decisions. Sociologist Lester Franklin Ward observes that the impetus moving people toward associated life “must reside in the affective department of man’s psychic nature” and that this claim “admits of no doubt.”[34] These young people’s experience of restlessness is more than a symptom of individual psychological maladjustment. They are heeding the call to enter into the wider fellowship of the era of association. This potent force is connecting the individual to wider webs of affiliation throughout the social habitat. It is a sign of how deeply its members are embedded in that web.

Addams does not “solve” the problem of domestic service with this analysis. Her method of ethical deliberation maps out the terrain and indicates the direction along which specific recommendations can be made. Addams’s method is not intended to function like a flow chart or a recipe that if followed will generate tidy solutions. The mistress-servant problem, like all of the social problems Addams deliberates on, belongs to the community as a whole, and the members of the community together need to contribute to its resolution.

In “A Belated Industry” Addams takes two themes from her previous essays and makes them the central focus of this variation of her method. Our biological inheritance from gregarious animal ancestors was one of several themes in “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements.” Universal fellowship was a focus in “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement.” In “A Belated Industry” Addams joins these themes together. In summary, the biologically based need for sociability or fellowship functions in this essay as the criterion that every social configuration must meet. Only if it is met can relationships and social habitats achieve a healthy equilibrium. This criterion could be met in the feudal system and could again be fulfilled if the era of association comes fully into being. Because society has already evolved out of feudalism to a significant extent, current relations still structured by feudal patterns no longer have the necessary social supports of the earlier era.

In “A Belated Industry” Addams focuses her portrayals of the feudal system and the factory workplace on whether they afford opportunities for fellowship. Addams’s appraisal is partial, shaped to make a particular point. This illustrates how one essay should not be taken as a representative microcosm of Addams’s thought. The social systems, institutions, and relationships Addams explores throughout the decade are complex and multifaceted; their full dimensions cannot be conveyed in one brief essay.

While Addams’s portrait of the feudal household is admittedly idealized, Addams uses this description to make a particular point about the present. The quotation she inserts from William Morris’s medieval tale illustrates why Addams may have felt this image was appropriate for conveying her point. Addams’s audiences were well acquainted with nineteenth-century authors such as Sir Walter Scott, Thomas Carlyle, John Ruskin, and William Morris whose portraits of an orderly and integrated medieval society served as a form of critique against the brutalities of industry.[35] To Addams’s audiences, an idealized image of medieval life was familiar and could easily bear the rhetorical weight Addams assigns to it. In “A Belated Industry” Addams does not criticize feudal practices during the feudal era for being inegalitarian or for perpetuating a hierarchy where power differentials are inherited. Neither does she address the degrading, oppressive conditions these young women face if they choose the factory over the private kitchen. Addams explored these aspects of factory work in “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement.” In “A Modern Tragedy,” examined next, Addams explores the hierarchical character of feudal relationships and the exploitative aspects of factory work. These portrayals recast her sunnier ones in “A Belated Industry” into darker shadows, while still reinforcing the central significance of fellowship for relational and social health.

“A Modern Tragedy”

In its most stripped-down form, Addams’s argument in “A Modern Tragedy” is the same as in “A Belated Industry.” In this variation the relationship between Pullman and his workers, like that between the household mistress and her domestic servant, is feudal in character at a time when social dynamic change into an era of association is well under way. A further parallel between these two variations is that both employers believe it is their prerogative to set the terms of employment, and both feel their subordinates do not appreciate their generosity. However, unlike the domestic servant, Pullman’s workers do not hold a feudal ethic. They are attuned to the direction of social dynamic change, as they demonstrated by forming a union. Within the union, decisions are made democratically and collectively. Negotiations with employers in effect take power over workplace decisions out of the sole hands of the employer and redistribute it between employer and workers. By participating in unions, workers progress toward an ethic of association. These two variations of Addams’s method, read together, bring out the varied responses working-class people have to feudal employment structures.

Yet in spite of their shared argument, the feel of the two variations, “A Belated Industry” and “A Modern Tragedy,” is utterly different. “A Modern Tragedy” is dramatic; its tone is dark. Its analysis is more sophisticated and layered. Addams devised her method of ethical deliberation to address social problems, but its use is not formulaic. Not all social dislocations can be approached as problems to be solved. Early in “A Modern Tragedy,” Addams admits the enormity of what Chicago faced in the ruinous aftermath of the strike. She writes, “The shocking experiences of that summer, the barbaric instinct to kill roused on both sides, the sharp division into class lines, with the resultant distrust and bitterness, can only be endured if we learn from it all a great ethical lesson. To endure is all we can hope for.”[36] To learn a lesson from this tragedy, Addams approaches it as a tragedy and seeks not a solution but wisdom.

Addams was personally involved in trying to settle the Pullman strike, one of the most significant labor disputes of the late nineteenth century. George Pullman was founder and president of the Pullman Palace Car Company at a time when the railroads were the lifeblood of the nation’s economy. In 1880 he built a model town for his workers and their families with brick houses, schools, a park, a theater, and other amenities. The town gained an international reputation. Visitors from abroad came for tours; the British Medical Journal praised its sewage disposal system.[37] With the recession of 1893, Pullman laid off one-third of his workers and cut the remaining workers’ pay by one-third but did not decrease their rents or lower prices at the company store. Although forbidden to unionize, many workers joined the American Railway Union and called a strike in May 1894.[38] Addams, as a member of the Chicago Civic Federation’s Conciliation Board, met with the workers. They agreed to full arbitration, but Pullman refused, saying there was nothing to negotiate. In late June Eugene Debs, head of the American Railway Union, called on his members to join in a nationwide sympathy strike. There was little violence until President Grover Cleveland called in federal troops. Violence then erupted, resulting in hundreds of arrests and a dozen deaths. Public sentiment in Chicago became heavily polarized. The strike ended in mid-July 1894 with a clear victory for Pullman. Hull House’s reputation suffered as wealthy donors withdrew financial support. By remaining neutral throughout the strike, Addams faced opposition from all sides.[39]

Shortly thereafter, Addams wrote “A Modern Tragedy,” an essay about these events that she delivered as a speech on several occasions.[40] In it she compares George Pullman to Shakespeare’s King Lear, calling the Pullman strike a “barbaric spectacle” and a “course of rage and riot.” To permit differences to culminate in such violence and hatred, she argues, is unconscionable when peaceful means of conciliation are available.[41] The Review of Reviews and the Forum rejected the essay for publication, saying it was dated and backward looking.[42] Horace E. Scudder, editor of the Atlantic Monthly, also rejected it. He disagreed with what he took to be Addams’s key premise, that Pullman had built the town out of philanthropic motives. It was far more plausible, he claimed, that Pullman, with thoroughly capitalist motives, treated the workers well so as to get a better return on his investment.[43] In 1912, fifteen years after Pullman’s death, the Survey published the essay under the title “A Modern Lear.”

For this variation, the image of Addams performing with a chorus is particularly apt. Addams’s solo lines, written out in “A Modern Tragedy,” complement those of the chorus. In effect, the chorus is the dominant voice, or at the least, the chorus sings for a good while before Addams’s voice enters. The dominant voices in the chorus are those of British Fabian socialists, most prominently Thomas Kirkup and Sidney Webb. Their voices provide the historical axis along which Addams’s solo lines proceed.

Commentators on “A Modern Tragedy” have not recognized this theoretical spine to Addams’s essay. Literary scholar Thomas Cartelli, for example, praises Addams’s imaginative and far-reaching use of King Lear as going well beyond what Shakespeare scholars of the time had to offer.[44] Yet his explanation for Addams’s insights is purely biographical. Addams could recognize the paternalism of Lear and Pullman because, as an educated young woman, she had chafed against the paternalistic expectations of her family. Cartelli concludes that the essay illustrates Addams’s gradualist and accommodationist approach to social reform, one that resisted the need for fundamental transformation of dominant social structures.[45] While parallels between the essay and Addams’s personal history can be drawn, Cartelli’s explanation does not take into account the intellectual foundations of the essay. Addams’s adaptation of the Fabian socialists’ evolutionary account is central to her analysis in “A Modern Tragedy.” It is true that Addams’s approach to social reform is gradualist and meliorist. Her thinking parallels that of scientists of the time who believed evolutionary change in biological habitats was a gradual process. However, her vision of social and structural change, most securely achieved through ameliorative processes, is utterly transformative.

To understand the historical axis Addams’s employs in “A Modern Tragedy,” the Fabians’ construal of socialism needs to be developed in detail. The British Fabian Society began in 1883 as an offshoot of the Fellowship of New Life. Influenced by the American romanticism of Emerson and Thoreau, the Fellowship of New Life defined its socialism as “a religion of democracy.” Its members wanted to revitalize moral life through fellowship with others. Some members interested in social reform broke away to form the Fabian Society.[46] Sidney Webb and Beatrice Potter Webb were leading theorists of Fabian socialism. Sidney Webb is often portrayed as a technocratic socialist, but his early writings belie this description. Like Addams, he identified with George Eliot’s ethical positivism. The Webbs infused their version of evolutionary social change with a humanitarian positivist ethic, much as Addams did in “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements.”[47] Fellow Fabian Thomas Kirkup, son of a Scottish shepherd, was primarily a writer who authored several books and encyclopedia articles on socialism.[48]

Figure 3. United States troops sent to Chicago, 1894. Note the association the cartoon makes between the Pullman strike (the train car at the foot of the tree) and social ills often ascribed to the union movement. Courtesy of Newberry Library, Chicago, Pullman 12-00-03, Box 3, Vol. 3, p. 2.

Kirkup and Sidney Webb describe nineteenth-century British economic history as an evolutionary process leading from feudalism to socialism. The nineteenth century began in feudalism with the estate-holding aristocracy still in control of the economy. By midcentury the economy had evolved toward industrial capitalism. Webb and Kirkup consider the capitalist owner as another manifestation of the feudal aristocrat. They interpret the rise of unions and increasing governmental regulation of industry as evidence of a gradual evolution out of feudalism and into socialism. These Fabians define socialism as “the economic side of Democracy,” or “the assertion of the right of the community to the complete control over the means of production by which the community lives.”[49] As evidence that the transition from feudalism to socialism was well under way, Webb points to the transfer from private to public control of post offices, telegraph lines, gasworks, docks, tramways, railways, and more. The process, however, was uneven. The fact that landed aristocrats and industrial capitalists still wielded considerable economic and political power in Great Britain at century’s end was an indication that remnants of the feudal system remained.[50] While the Fabians give an economic definition of socialism, they also include intellectual growth and the cultivation of character as integral to the transition from feudalism to socialism.[51]

Like other social scientists of the time, Kirkup and Webb conceive of society as an organism and not merely a collection of individuals. The well-being of each individual is a function of the health and stability of the social organism’s equilibrium.[52] The experiences of individuals within the social habitat reflect the patterns of social statics and social dynamics that characterize it. Webb writes,

Owing mainly to the efforts of Comte, Darwin, and Herbert Spencer, we can no longer think of the ideal society as an unchanging State. The social ideal from being static has become dynamic. The necessity of the constant growth and development of the social organism has become axiomatic. No philosopher now looks for anything but the gradual evolution of the new order from the old, without breach of continuity or abrupt change of the entire social tissue at any point during the process.[53]

This passage reflects how Kirkup and Webb distinguish their understanding of socialism from earlier French and English versions and from Marxism. They point out that writers such as François-Noël Babeuf, Comte de Saint-Simon, Charles Fourier, and Robert Owen proposed visions of socialism that were nonevolutionary and thus static and utopian.[54] In Britain at the time, “socialism” was generally understood to be distinct from Marxism, which the British identified with hard-line historical materialism.[55] While Marx’s account is historical, it is not evolutionary in the Darwinian sense. Kirkup observes that the conditions of the working class were not becoming increasingly desperate, as Marx had anticipated, but were improving as the public assumed control of various aspects of the economy. Webb describes Fabian socialism as “the path of escape” from the “social cataclysm” that Marx had predicted.[56]

Addams does not name Kirkup and Webb in “A Modern Tragedy,” but her pattern of reasoning and her vocabulary mirror theirs. Direct evidence that Addams was working with their writings is provided by two passages in which Addams, without attribution or quotation marks, quotes or closely paraphrases passages from Kirkup’s A History of Socialism. Addams writes in Twenty Years at Hull-House that she read extensively on economics in the early 1890s.[57] She included books by Kirkup and Webb on the bibliography for a series of lectures she gave at the University of Chicago in 1899.[58] Beatrice and Sidney Webb were eager to meet with Addams when she was in London in June 1896, and Addams enjoyed hosting them at Hull House two years later.[59] Beatrice Webb characterized Addams as “gentle and dignified [and] shrewdly observant.”[60] Addams’s friendship with the Webbs continued for decades.

“A Modern Tragedy” explores the psychological dimensions of living in a social habitat in which feudal structures still hold considerable sway. To American ears, Addams’s comparison between modern industrialist George Pullman and feudal King Lear sounds purely metaphoric. Most Americans are not accustomed to thinking of their own history as containing a feudal past. However, when Addams’s analogy between Pullman and Lear is placed within the Fabian account of nineteenth-century economic history, the analogy becomes a historical argument.

Addams’s analysis in “A Modern Tragedy” can be organized, first, around her portrayal of Pullman as a feudal lord in a way that mirrors Kirkup’s and Webb’s theoretical placement of British industrialists. Second, Addams’s analysis of the psychological dimensions of inhabiting this role complements Kirkup and Webb’s account, while going beyond it. Finally, Addams’s positioning of Lear’s daughter Cordelia as analogous to Pullman’s workers parallels Kirkup’s and Webb’s descriptions of the labor movement in England.

In positioning Pullman as a modern counterpart to King Lear, Addams invokes feudalism’s penumbra of associations. Both men followed the feudal ethical code of reciprocal but asymmetric obligations. Feudal lords were responsible for ensuring that their subordinates had basic provisions and safety, even during periods of poor harvests or when under attack. Thus, under feudalism, “benevolence” is a structural feature of the feudal relationship, regardless of the feudal lord’s conscious intentions or personal virtues. Addams does say that Lear was selfish, but she clarifies her meaning by inserting Romantic poet Samuel Coleridge’s description of Lear as exhibiting “the selfishness of a loving and kindly nature alone.”[61] Lear as king, who considered all of Britain his own, could be particularly magnanimous in offering each of his daughters one-third of his kingdom. Whether Lear was acting out of personal, generous feelings or used this offering to demonstrate his power over Britain and his daughters is irrelevant to Addams’s analysis. Pullman was similarly magnanimous in building the town of Pullman for his workers. In doing so he went far beyond his industrial peers, who mocked him for risking profits for the sake of “flower beds and fountains.”[62] Pullman’s town may have been more magnificent than the cottages serfs generally lived in, but this is merely a quantitative, not a qualitative difference. Regardless of Pullman’s personal motivation, the town was a gift of feudal generosity, and Pullman expected his workers to show the gratitude of feudal subjects by complying with his orders not to unionize or strike. That Lear was incensed at Cordelia’s refusal of his offer, and that Pullman was incensed when his workers insisted on forming a union, gives evidence that Lear and Pullman expected their subordinates to fulfill their feudal obligations of loyalty, obedience, and gratitude.

When Scudder rejected “A Modern Tragedy” for the Atlantic Monthly, saying that Addams constructed the essay around Pullman’s personal motives, he misunderstood the import of Addams’s claim that Pullman’s actions and motivations were feudal.[63] Addams agrees with Scudder that Pullman was motivated by profit, noting that he aimed for a 4 percent return on his investment.[64] However, her portrayal of Pullman’s actions before and during the strike draw attention to factors laissez-faire economists ignore. Classical economics presumes that capitalists separate their personal feelings from their business decisions. Addams demonstrates that these are indelibly mixed by pointing out parallels between Pullman’s reactions to his workers and King Lear’s reactions to his youngest daughter, Cordelia. When Cordelia rejects her father’s magnanimous offer of a third of his kingdom, Lear’s rage signifies “the entanglements of wounded affections” through which he attempts to assert his authority. Similarly, Pullman became “hard and angry” and “believed [his workers were] misled by ill-advisors and wandering in a mental fog” when he refused their offer to submit the dispute to arbitration.[65] Lear and Pullman were bitter when those under their authority refused to respond to them with gratitude. What “cut deepest” was when their publics turned on them, perceiving Lear as pitiful and Pullman as oppressive and unjust.[66]

The most significant point for understanding “A Modern Tragedy” is to recognize that while Addams names emotions experienced by Lear and Pullman, she is not writing about the psychology of specific individuals, whether fictive or real. Instead, she is exploring the psychological dimensions of occupying a specific social role, that of being the more powerful member in a feudal relationship during a time of transition into the era of association. Addams positions Lear and Pullman as personifications of that role and not individual persons. Addams states as much when she writes that she could have chosen a different company, for example, Pennsylvania Steel & Iron, for this analysis. She chose the Pullman Company because its labor dispute was recent and had been heavily covered in the press.[67] Instead of regarding “A Modern Tragedy” as an analysis of named individuals, readers may find it helpful to approach it as a literary presentation of historical, evolutionary processes then under way in society.

Had Scudder taken into account Addams’s historical axis in the essay, he could have clarified his confusion. Webb and Kirkup do not consider capitalism to be an economic system based on natural laws of supply and demand, as Enlightenment thinkers did, nor as a distinct historical stage, as Marx did. Instead, they view capitalism as a temporary phase of chaotic disequilibrium within social evolutionary movement out of feudalism and into socialism. Webb describes capitalism as anarchic, “a state of unrestrained license.”[68] He uses a feudal image in claiming that private property in the means of production represents the “‘monarchizing’ of industry.”[69] Some of Webb’s non-Fabian colleagues agreed with this description. A more colorful version comes from Scottish biologist and sociologist Patrick Geddes, a critic of the Fabians whose work Addams admired. In an 1886 lecture Geddes stated, “It has often been pointed out how completely the ancient baron in his castle on the crag represented the modern capitalist whose castle is in his bag.”[70]

Kirkup tells a similar story. On feudal estates, feudal lords and those who labored for them were connected to “the natural sources of subsistence and culture.”[71] As the eighteenth century turned into the nineteenth, workers’ labor had become “free” of feudal ties, and their connection to these “natural sources of subsistence and culture” was severed. Kirkup concurs with Webb that private ownership in the means of production “leads inevitably to social and economic anarchy” and to increased suffering and degradation for workers.[72] But to call capitalism an “economic system” is misleading. The highly integrated operations of industrial factories typify the age of association, while factory control by a single owner is a feudal practice. Kirkup writes, “Under this system industry was organized into a vast social operation, and was thus already so far socialised; but it was a system that was exploited by the individual owner of the capital at his own pleasure and for his own behoof.” In “A Modern Tragedy” Addams echoes this passage by rearranging it a bit and writing without attribution, “Industry is organized into a vast social operation. The shops are managed, however, not for the development of the workmen thus socialized, but for the interests of the company owning the capital.”[73] Kirkup interprets the rise of unions and public regulation of industry as signs that the spirit of association is gradually replacing economic anarchy. Workers are being reconnected to the “natural sources of subsistence and culture,” as labor and capital are joining together in a socialist rather than a feudal equilibrium, based on the principle of association.[74]

Addams does not use “A Modern Tragedy” as an opportunity to critique the structure of industrial capitalism. Doing so would grant it systemic status that she, with Kirkup and Webb, do not think it deserves. Instead, Addams turns her focus away from the chorus lines so clearly sung by Kirkup and Webb and writes that she will “consider this great social disaster; not in its legal aspect, nor in its sociological bearing, but from those deep human motives and elemental passions which after all determine all events.”[75] Addams’s decision to tell the story in familial terms makes sense when the essay is read as a psychological and ethical complement to the Fabian socialists’ interpretation of industrial capitalism.

By portraying Pullman as a feudal father, Addams is able to acknowledge Pullman’s humanity as a person with emotional connections to those with whom he associates and not solely as a profit maximizer, as laissez-faire economics assumes. Feeling bitter, enraged, and deeply cut are human emotions, indicating that Pullman’s social instincts, like Lear’s, were still operative. Whether Pullman in fact felt these emotions is beside the point; Addams at least holds onto the possibility that capitalist owners are capable of holding ethical relations with workers and thus capable of entering into the age of association. Pullman’s social isolation lay at the heart of his estrangement from his workers, just as it had for the household mistress and her domestic servant.

To Addams, Pullman’s capacity for goodness was distorted by his isolation. Just as the household mistress so concentrated her goodness on her family that she could not see goodness in her servants, so Pullman’s egoistic goodness accounts for his inability to perceive the ethical dimensions of his workers’ efforts to unionize.[76] Lear and Pullman had both been “tainted and warped” by self-righteousness; Lear’s was “personal” and “barbaric,” while Pullman’s was “the diffused, subtle self-righteous of the modern philanthropist.”[77] Pullman’s goodness had turned inward to the point of becoming organically pathological. His heart was so “stretched and strained” by his own personal goodness that he could not bring his heart into rhythm with humanity’s “common heartbeat.” In this way, Addams writes, “The function of the simple organic cell is hytrophied.”[78] As Pullman’s heart became morbidly increased by excessive, egoistic benevolence, he lost “the faculty of affectionate interpretation.”[79] In terms of evolutionary psychology, he had lost the most fundamental capacity that enables gregarious species to survive, the capacity to have one’s social and sympathetic instincts activated by the needs and sufferings of others. Addams’s organic imagery is less metaphoric than it may seem, when understood within the organic conception of society. Pullman had lost the life-giving capacity to enter into healthy interdependence with others within the social organism.

Addams pinpoints how Pullman failed for the same reason as the household mistress failed. “Lack of perception,” Addams writes, “is the besetting danger of the egoist, from whatever cause his egoism arises and envelopes [sic] him.”[80] The mistress failed to apprehend “the trend of the time” and so was insensitive to the changing social dynamic going on around her. Similarly, Pullman, like Lear in an earlier time, does not apprehend “the great moral lessons,” “the genuine feeling,” “the social passion” of the age sweeping through the land.[81] Webb also employs this imagery, when he speaks of the “mighty sweep and tendency of social evolution” moving like “an irresistible wave,” manifest in biology, sociology, politics, and industry.[82] Pullman does not recognize that history is moving into the age of association, as he does not recognize his workers’ unionizing as a form of “associated expression.” Quoting Mazzini, Addams writes, “The consent of men and your own conscience, are two wings given you whereby you may rise to God.”[83] Pullman’s conscience should join with the workers’ consent; only in this way is true progress possible.

Finally, Addams’s analysis of Pullman’s workers paired with her comments about Lear’s daughter Cordelia map onto the Fabian socialists’ analysis of the trade union movement. Much of the work of entering the era of association, Webb comments, is being carried out by ordinary people unaware that they are responding to social dynamic forces working within them. This claim parallels Addams’s remarks in “A Belated Industry” about the young working women and young farmers who choose factory work in the cities.[84] It also parallels Addams’s description of Lear’s daughter Cordelia. While Addams acknowledges the role of Cordelia’s suitors in her flight to France, she gives Cordelia’s response a wider significance. Cordelia had glimpsed the “hint . . . [of] a fuller life beyond the seas”; she was caught “in the sweep of a notion of justice so large that the immediate loss of the kingdom seemed of little consequence to her.”[85] Similarly, Pullman’s workers found themselves “plunged” into a “higher fellowship and life of association.” They found themselves caught “in the sweep of a world-wide impulse,” one articulated in the slogan “The injury to one is the concern of all.” Their watchwords were brotherhood and self-sacrifice, ones that could lead them into the era of association. Addams admits that their actions in the strike were “ill directed, . . . ill-timed and disastrous in result.” Nonetheless, she could sense the unselfish, moral impulse that lay beneath outward appearances as both Cordelia and the workers responded to social dynamic processes during their eras.[86]

Addams issues similar warnings to Cordelia and to Pullman’s workers. Even though Addams admires Cordelia for responding to the moral impulse, she judges her as “vainly striving” toward the larger conception of justice. In words adapted from Mazzini, she reminds Cordelia that duties to both family and the wider world must be honored and brought into adjustment. Addams chastises Cordelia for deserting Lear “through her self-absorption” and reminds her of George Eliot’s words that “pity, memory, and faithfulness are natural ties.”[87] Likewise, Pullman’s workers should not settle for “a narrow conception of emancipation” that excludes the employers. Doing so would make the workers akin to Lear’s older daughters, who treat Lear cruelly once they receive their portions of the kingdom.[88] The outcome, Addams predicts, would parallel Cordelia’s. When Cordelia realizes her error and remembers her familial bond, she returns to her father, whose rage had driven him to madness. They die tragically together. Cordelia, like her father, Addams writes, had been “drawn into the cruelty and wrath, which had now become objective and tragic.” Addams immediately draws the conclusion that to avoid a parallel tragedy, “the emancipation of working-people will have to be inclusive of the employer from the first, or it will encounter many failures, cruelties, and reactions.”[89]

The aim of the labor movement must be, Addams states in words also found in Kirkup, “the complete participation of the working-classes in the spiritual, intellectual, and material inheritance of the human race.”[90] This expresses Addams’s call for universal fellowship, as discussed in her previous essays. The cure for Pullman’s distended heart and the key to social advance is through what Addams calls “lateral progress,” an idea that Webb also expresses.[91] Workers and employers together should enter the age of association. This task is not easy. Addams admits that in working toward this unity, one will “often have the sickening sense of compromise,” a manifestation of the sense of self-distrust she had made integral to her method.[92] Addams agrees with Webb that theorists and reformers who are conscious of social dynamic movement can help foster the transition to the era of association, but they cannot impose the new order. The path of entrance is that of organic growth. It is “no easy task,” Addams writes, “to touch to vibrating response, the noble fibre in each man, to pull these many fibres, fragile, impalpable, and constantly breaking as they are, into one impulse, to gradually foster that impulse through its feeble and tentative stages into another of like action.”[93] Social reform achieved this way will come slowly but will be secure.

In October 1894, three months after the Pullman strike ended, Dewey wrote to his wife, Alice, about a conversation he had had with Addams. Addams believed, he recounted, “that antagonism was not only useless and harmful, but entirely unnecessary; that it lay never in the objective differences, which would always grow into unity if left alone, but from a person’s mixing in his own personal reactions.” He told Alice he had responded with the Hegelian point that antagonism could be “of ideas and institutions” and sometimes might lead to truth and “a consciousness of growth.” Nonetheless, he was powerfully impressed. Addams had given him “the most magnificent exhibition of intellectual & moral faith I ever saw.”[94] Two days later he wrote to Addams of his “suspiciously sudden conversion,” saying, “I wish to take back what I said the other night. Not only is actual antagonizing bad, but the assumption that there is or may be antagonism is bad.”[95] Dewey had worried about Addams after the strike. In August he wrote to his family that he had seen Addams conversing about an arbitration conference and commented, “The expression of her face is sad to the point of haunting one.”[96] Addams appreciated Dewey’s ability to listen and reflect. She later sent him a draft of “A Modern Tragedy” for comment. Before suggesting a few minor adjustments, he exclaimed, “It is one of the greatest things I ever read both as to its form & its ethical philosophy.”[97]

In their studies of Dewey, Robert Westbrook and Louis Menand cover this exchange in detail. They studied “A Modern Lear,” the essay’s published version, trying to interpret what Addams meant. Neither hears the voices of the Fabian socialists in the chorus or how Addams echoes and complements their lines. Westbrook thinks Addams was primarily concerned with autonomy, in this case, the workers’ right to assert their autonomous voices and thus participate in industrial affairs.[98] He misses how Addams’s understanding of democratic participation in industrial affairs grows out of the image of society as a social organism and is far removed from an Enlightenment-based, individualistic notion of autonomy. Menand writes that Addams thought the tension between Pullman’s values of “individualism and paternalism” and the workers’ values of “mutuality and self-determination” would in time work itself out. Menand misses the historical frame Addams uses to locate Pullman’s values as feudal and thus resistant to social dynamic forces leading to the age of association.[99] Westbrook concludes that Addams, as well as Dewey, “psychologize[d]” labor conflicts by focusing on psychological traits rather than structural features.[100] Addams, by positioning Pullman as a feudal lord, is making a structural critique, through exploring the psychological dimensions of occupying the role. Addams objects to antagonism because to her, as to the Fabian socialists, antagonism between capitalist employers and workers is itself feudal and belated and hinders progress through cooperative, associative relations that characterize what the Fabians call “socialism.”[101] When this process is complete, dominant social structures will have been utterly transformed.

Addams had made her thinking on antagonism clear at the Civic Federation’s Congress on Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration, held a few months after the strike ended. Addams gave a short introduction at a session she chaired in which she set the role of arbitration within the phases of democracy’s evolution. During the late eighteenth century, Addams reminded the audience, the first phase of democracy was ushered in as working people demanded political equality. Chicago’s current labor unrest indicated that the city had entered into the next phase, as workers called for equality in industrial conditions and material benefits. Arbitration, Addams states, “wishes to substitute the desire for justice for the emotion which now drives men forward, due to a condition of hatred and antagonism. It wishes to substitute moral and intellectual forces for the physical forces which too often appear in a strike.” Antagonism, as understood in the evolutionary psychology of the day, issues from primitive pugnacious instincts that have not been subjected to the social instincts’ restraining influence. Strikes represent “the old belated methods of warfare.” To think and act in terms of class divisions between capitalists and workers is itself feudal, analogous to the feudal division between nobles and plebeians. Arbitration, Addams notes, is a more “modern method.” It is imperfect in that it retains an emphasis on class divisions. Nonetheless, Addams considers substituting arbitration for the labor strike and thus refusing to act on the basis of antagonism, a sign of evolutionary progress.[102]

Only Dewey’s account of what he thought he heard Addams say is known. Whether she was explicit about how she derived her conception of antagonism from evolutionary accounts, and whether Dewey was familiar enough with Fabian social theorizing to be able to hear her words appropriately, is not known. Westbrook, Menand, and at least for a time, Dewey, did not understand that Addams opposed antagonism because she believed, with Webb and Kirkup, that antagonism leads to social evolutionary regression. It hinders progress by setting up further barriers to eventual reconciliation.

Was Addams a socialist? Much as Addams agrees with the stance taken by Kirkup and Webb, she does not label herself as such. After giving a detailed account of the Pullman strike, historian Donald L. Miller contrasts Hull House resident Florence Kelley’s response with that of Addams. After noting that Kelley joined the Socialist Party of America, Miller writes, “Her friend Jane Addams, however, remained committed to the peaceful settlement of labor disputes and the fundamental correctness of capitalism itself.”[103] Without knowledge of Webb’s and Kirkup’s historical placement of capitalism as a temporary state of social disequilibrium between feudalism and Fabian socialism, Miller has scant alternatives for understanding Addams’s position.

Scholars more attuned to Addams’s socialist tendencies have noted Addams’s reluctance to be identified as a socialist. Knight, in her careful consideration of Addams’s resistance to Marxism, does not discuss British socialism. She emphasizes Addams’s commitment to following her own conscience, a point Addams makes in Twenty Years at Hull-House. Philosopher Maurice Hamington also focuses on Addams’s objections to Marxism. He calls Addams a “reluctant socialist,” in light of her activism on behalf of the working class.[104] In Twenty Years at Hull-House Addams recalls that in the settlement’s early days, Russians who held a “crude interpretation” dominated discussions of socialism.[105] This may have been a factor in Addams’s reluctance to call herself a socialist, a position shared by some of her midwestern colleagues. Henry Demarest Lloyd, Chicago journalist and labor reformer, wrote to a colleague that if he were in England, he would be happy to be known as a Fabian socialist and adds, “I have been revolted, here, by the hard tone of the German Socialists, who are about all we have.”[106] Addams’s editor, economist Richard T. Ely, also did not identify himself as a socialist. He thought that an economy based on cooperation rather than competition would respond to socialists’ legitimate grievances, while forestalling the more hard-line versions of socialism advocated by many self-identified socialists in the United States.[107] For Addams, Lloyd, and Ely to call themselves socialists in Chicago would have been more confusing than clarifying. In “A Modern Tragedy” Addams deftly adapts and extends British socialist thinking for an American audience, keeping her explicitly socialist sources just below the surface.

“The College Woman and the Family Claim”

The contrast in subject matter between “A Modern Tragedy” and “The College Woman and the Family Claim” is stark. In “A Modern Tragedy” Pullman and his workers stand at the far edges of wealth and poverty, the one motivated by profit, the other trying to stave off lives of desperation. In “College Woman” the college-educated daughter shares her parents’ affluence; long-established bonds of affection envelop the misunderstandings between them. Yet the structure of Addams’s analysis in both essays is the same. Identical phrases appear in both.[108]

The geographical axis in “College Woman” describes a significant social problem of the time, that of familial tensions experienced by the first sizable generation of women in the United States to attain a college education. The historical axis runs from feudalism to the present. Like Pullman, the parents hold to a feudal ethic, while, like Pullman’s workers, the young college-educated daughter is responding to social dynamic movement toward an ethic of association. In “A Modern Tragedy” Addams draws out the devastating psychological impact on a person who blocks that dynamic movement, that moral impulse. In “College Woman” Addams explores the experience of being pulled toward that new ethic. Addams makes it clear that Pullman’s workers suffered from his intransigence, but she says little about how they experienced the process of being drawn into solidarity. In this variation Addams lays bare how ambiguous and destabilizing it is to traverse that terrain. While still recommending that parents and daughter together enter the era of association, Addams also redefines the ethical task as one of seeking reconciliation between the family claim and the social claim.

Addams had direct knowledge of the geographical axis or the social statics of the tension young college women faced. Early in the essay she writes, “This paper is the result of reflections forced upon the writer by the struggles and misgiving she has often witnessed when the ‘grown-up’ daughter attempts to carry out plans concerning which her parents are unsympathetic or indifferent.”[109] Biographers have explored how the young Addams’s desire to study and seek her own path came into conflict with society’s expectations, as well as those of her father and stepmother.[110] These tensions were particularly acute for young women like Addams who continued their education beyond high school. Addams’s generation of women was the first to attend college in any significant numbers. Between the Civil War and the end of the nineteenth century, opportunities for higher education grew rapidly. New land-grant state institutions in the West and Midwest admitted women as well as men. In the East, the “Seven Sisters” colleges opened as counterparts to the well-established elite male universities. In the South, institutions of higher learning for African American men and women opened their doors, as did private colleges for white women.[111] In 1870, approximately 1 percent of college-aged men and women attended college, increasing to 2 percent by 1900. In 1870, 21 percent of college students were women, rising to 36 percent in 1900.[112]

Even when young women could attend college, they faced particular barriers to higher learning. Prominent scientists and physicians argued that women who expended energy in higher learning damaged their reproductive abilities. Some scientists interpreted women’s relatively smaller brain size as indicative of lower intellectual capacities compared to men.[113] Once women completed college, it was difficult to find arenas in which to exercise their newly acquired knowledge and skills. Expectations were high that young women marry and dedicate themselves to family concerns. Aside from teaching, few professions were open to them.[114]

Women, however, were by no means captive in the home. Historian Kirsten Delegard writes that 1880–1920 was “a veritable golden age of women’s organizations . . . among every class, race, ethnicity, and region.”[115] When Addams wrote “College Woman,” women in Chicago were heavily engaged in social reform, although gendered expectations circumscribed the forms their activism could take. Women’s organizations, including the Chicago Woman’s Club, the Women’s Aid Association, the Women’s Christian Temperance Union, the Illinois Social Science Association, and many religiously affiliated activist groups, provided channels for women’s efforts.[116] College-educated young women of Addams’s time could taste the possibilities for stretching their intellects and talents while serving the public good, yet they encountered legal, social, and familial opposition when they reached for them.

In “The College Woman and the Family Claim” as in “A Belated Industry” and “A Modern Tragedy,” Addams gives a psychological analysis that complements and extends the Fabian socialists’ historical axis of social evolutionary progress from feudalism to the present. The affluent parents’ ethics are feudal in that they expect to continue to exercise authority over their young adult daughter once she finishes college. Like feudal aristocrats, they have lavished her with the privileges of wealth. The daughter’s “delicacy and polish” are signs of “her father’s protection and prosperity.” Because she is “freed from the necessity of self-support,” she has opportunities for higher education and travel.[117] In college she is educated much as young men, who are taught to develop their talents and prepare to take their place in the world. Through this education the daughter learns about “the good of the whole” and “the claims of human brotherhood.” She learns that she, too, is a “citizen of the world,” and she wants to use her intellect, talents, and energy in response.[118] When the daughter finishes college, her hopes clash with her parents’ expectation that she devote herself to family matters, resulting in struggle and heartache for parents and daughter alike.

The parents’ feudal ethical code, however, has calcified their perceptions. They cannot imagine how to reconcile with their beloved daughter who senses what they cannot, the dynamic social forces leading to the era of association. The daughter responds with words Addams gave to Cordelia in “A Modern Tragedy,” asking, “Where is the larger life of which she has dreamed so long? that life of the race which surrounds and completes the individual and family life?”[119]

The image in this question of “surrounds and completes” contrasts with the image of moving along a historical axis, and Addams needs concepts to supplement that movement. Cordelia’s and the daughter’s question invokes Mazzini, and in broad outline Addams’s response parallels his. In The Duties of Man, Mazzini’s keyword is “association,” and his key image is that of concentric circles of duties to family, country, and then to all of humanity. Through association people could adjust and harmonize their duties to each circle.[120] However, Mazzini says little about the process through which these concentric circles of duty can be adjusted and harmonized. While Mazzini states that women should share equally with men in efforts toward social amelioration, he also imagines that the “angel of the family is Woman.” He does not acknowledge the tension between these roles.[121]

To explore this tension, Addams may have drawn inspiration from George Eliot, as she had in “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement.” Addams does not name Maggie Tulliver, the main character in Eliot’s novel The Mill on the Floss, but Maggie could well have been on Addams’s mind.[122] Through reading and romance, Maggie felt the wider world tugging on her intellect and emotions. Her family, with their rigid family code, fought all her attempts to respond. Torn between her family and the pull of the larger world, Maggie in the end refuses to abandon her family. She rescues her brother, Tom, from the rising floodwaters, only to have their boat pulled under. Maggie and Tom, like Lear and Cordelia, find reconciliation in tragic death. Addams’s challenge is to identify a path toward reconciliation in which familial ties and the call of the world can be brought into harmony and tragedy avoided.

In “College Woman” Addams explores this tension between family and the social world at length. To do so, she departs from Mazzini, substituting “claim” for “duty,” to reveal how painful the clash of family claim and social claim can be. “Claim” is a more complex notion and less easily delineated than duties, which are often defined by laws or abstract moral rules. Addams had mentioned the tension between the family claim and the social claim before. In “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements” she writes of a college-educated young woman who “begins to recognize her social claim to the ‘submerged tenth,’ and to evince a disposition to fulfill it.” At this point her family asserts its claim and tells the young woman her efforts are “unjustified [and] ill-advised.”[123] Eliot also spoke of claims. Maggie’s parents, Eliot writes, “had the primary natural claim on her.” Stephen, with new romantic exuberance, asks, “Who can have so great a claim on you as I have?” Philip, in steady affection, writes to Maggie, “I have no just claim on you for more than affectionate remembrance.”[124]

For Eliot and Addams, claims arise within people’s particular personal histories and carry emotional freight. The struggle between claims is located not only between the parents and their daughter but also within the daughter’s psyche. The daughter experiences the family claim “entwined with filial piety” and “rooted in the tenderest affections of which the human heart is capable.” At the same time, she cannot deny the social claim. Doing so “represses her mental convictions” and “lowers her springs of vitality.”[125] The parents, relying on women’s centuries-long absorption in the family, have no framework in which to understand what is in the young woman’s heart and can only conclude she is selfish for wanting to participate in concerns that lie outside the family.[126]

The daughter and Pullman’s workers occupy the same role in Addams’s analyses, as they search for ways to respond to the moral impulse, the social dynamic movement. Their actions are awkward, not only from inexperience but because the situations they face are themselves ambiguous. As Addams describes it, “The situation has all the discomfort of transition and compromise.” It is “vague and unformulated,” just as a biological habitat undergoing evolutionary change faces a yet unformulated future.[127] The daughter, in spite of her educational advantages, or perhaps because of them, has hurdles to overcome that the workers do not face. Her education has so favored her intellect that her overall development is unbalanced. Her upbringing and education have taught her “to distrust utterly the most human impulses of her nature,” impulses that connect her to those she encounters. She has had no contact with “the feebleness of childhood, the pathos of suffering or the needs of old age,” experiences with which working-class young people were more familiar.[128] While Addams’s language is touching, her intent is scientific. The daughter has not had the range of experiences that workers have had that could activate her sympathetic instincts and draw her to those in need. These instincts must be engaged in order to fulfill the social claim.

To help in the analysis, Addams again calls on a feudal family from an earlier time of social dynamic change. In “College Woman” St. Francis and his father play the same role as Cordelia and King Lear in “A Modern Tragedy.”[129] Like Cordelia, Francis abandoned his father in order to respond to the moral impulse of his age. Addams, using a description likely based on Frederic Harrison’s history of the era, places Francis within “the religious revival sweeping Europe from end to end in the early half of the 13th century.”[130] Francis’s father failed the same way Lear and Pullman failed. Much as he loved his son, he could not perceive the moral impulse that gave evidence of social dynamic movement. To reconcile with his son, Francis’s father would need to be “touched by the fire of the same revival.” To reconcile with their daughter, the parents need to share her newly awakened sensitivity to the world beyond the family.[131] Just as Pullman and his workers need to join together in association, so the family as a whole needs to enter the social claim’s enlarged sphere of activity.

Adjusting these claims is a matter of organic growth. Here Addams benefited from evolutionary readings of Mazzini by John Morley. In a related essay Addams quotes from Morley’s On Compromise, where he states, “Contented acquiescence in the ordering that has come down to us from the past is selfish and anti-social because amid the ceaseless change that is inevitable in a growing organism the institutions of the past demand progressive readaptation.”[132] Addams takes this organic image seriously, as she had in “A Modern Tragedy.” She concludes “The College Woman and the Family Claim” by stating that family claims and social claims can be brought into harmony only through organic growth, and not by intellectual or willed adoption of extended duties. She adds, “The new growth in the plant, swelling against the sheath which at the same time imprisons and protects it, must still be the truest type of progress.”[133] Addams is not sanguine about progress in the short term. She concludes, “The harmonious, intelligent and consistent development of such a movement is as yet impossible.”[134]

One could read Addams’s response in this essay, as in “A Belated Industry” and “A Modern Tragedy,” as pessimistic. Growth toward the age of association must be organic; attempts to force it will fail. At the end of “The College Woman and the Family Claim,” Addams gives the same advice as in “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement.” She asks her readers to be tolerant and nonjudgmental toward efforts that appear awkward or ill intentioned until organic processes of growth have done their work.[135] Yet Addams, in calling for nonjudgmental tolerance, is not advocating quietism. She believes that human actions can affect processes of organic growth. Like Morley, she believes that much can be done during times of disequilibrium to make “progressive readaptation.”

Addams’s analysis in “The College Woman and the Family Claim” shows how profoundly ecological Addams’s ethical vision is. In language, we can distinguish between “myself” and “my surroundings,” but to do so gives false comfort. There are distinctions, but no difference between inside and outside. As biological creatures we cannot live except through constant exchange, and the same is true of us as social creatures. Individual psychological processes and social ones flow in and through each other. The daughter feels her parents’ expectations not only as outside forces constricting her but also as deeply shared emotional ties, binding her to them. She can hear the call of the world outside, but she experiences it internally, even physiologically. A person does not merely live in a habitat but is thoroughly of the habitat and the habitat is of the person.

When Addams writes that “life itself teaches us nothing more inevitable than that right and wrong are most confusedly mixed,” she is making an ethical observation backed by a profound evolutionary and ecological truth.[136] Right and wrong, good and evil, just and unjust, guilt and innocence cannot be fundamental divisions of the moral universe. These concepts should not be dissolved; Addams was not a determinist. But these concepts are of lesser rank. Addams puts tolerance, sympathy, and forbearance at the heart of the moral universe. These are relational terms that draw us together in understanding, not judgments that separate. In his Letter from a Birmingham Jail Martin Luther King spoke eloquently of injustice, but he also spoke of the “inescapable network of mutuality” that binds us all. In “The College Woman and the Family Claim” Addams shows how that net runs from its anchors in the social world to the very depths of our being.

*

Addams’s deliberations in the three essays discussed in this chapter reinforce how distinctive her mode of ethical analysis is from theories derived from classical liberalism. These make a distinction between the private and the public spheres. They assume that the ethics of the family issue from ties of blood, affection, and personal decency, while the public sphere is structured by contractual agreements that define what counts as justice. By showing parallels among the three sets of relationships, one familial, one within the home though not familial, and one in the public sphere of the workplace, Addams demonstrates how the ethics of private and public elide. For Addams, the unit of ethical analysis is not the individual, whether in private home or public workplace. The unit of analysis is the relationship as it functions within the larger social setting. By analyzing pairs of relations within and across private-public boundaries, Addams shows how thin and permeable those boundaries are.

The morally troubling situations Addams discusses could be analyzed in terms of exploitation and oppression. It seems obvious to slip the social problems Addams addresses into these categories, and scholars have done so to good account. However, Addams rarely uses the language of exploitation and oppression. Considering these three essays together shows what is missed when exploitation and oppression are primary filters. Addams shows the structural similarities between the three situations and makes explicit the psychological and relational costs to be borne by both the powerful and the powerless. Yes, Pullman’s treatment of his workers was exploitive. When that is the primary lens, the mind moves quickly to supposing the solution is more laws, more company policies, or a reconstructed economic system. Addams certainly supported these things. She and the residents of Hull House worked hard to see that laws and policies barring exploitation were enacted and systemic change undertaken. But she knew that wasn’t enough. She demonstrated this by giving the same structural analysis to tensions within a loving, economically secure family and those within an exploitive workplace. Families can be sites of exploitation, but much as the daughter was constrained by her parent’s expectations, to judge her parents as exploitive or oppressive is too heavy handed. It is more fitting in this situation to call for reconciliation and harmonizing of claims. Addams’s point is that reconciliation and harmonizing of claims are needed in the workplace as well. Better rules and even systemic reconstruction cannot by themselves heal relationships. With the image of the social organism and the evolving habitat at the center of her vision, Addams’s ethics encompasses both systemic change and reconciliation. The path toward social healing is not easy. While undergoing organic growth, the challenge is to accept the ambiguities inherent in times of social transition and respond to them with patience and tolerance.

Addams’s approach, by starting with the morally troubling situation, also reveals the limitations of using categories such as gender, race, and class as primary interpretative lenses. Using the same historical axis, Addams is able to see basic structural parallels among three disparate pairs of relationships, between mistress and servant, industrialist and worker, and parent and adult daughter. Addams’s analyses, taken together, cross lines of gender, race, and class. The wealthy adult daughter is broadening her ethical vision, while the other three women, her mother, the mistress, and the domestic servant, are not. It is appropriate to speak about race in this context, as Anglo-Saxons at the time considered immigrants from southern and eastern Europe racially distinct and inferior to themselves.[137] It is likely that many industrialists and household employers regarded themselves as racially superior to their workers, who were largely immigrants.[138] The college-educated daughter, who may well have been Anglo-Saxon, was moving toward the era of association, as were immigrant factory workers. The immigrant domestic servant retains her feudal ethic, while her factory working-class peers, with the wealthy daughter, were moving beyond that. For Addams, there is more than one path to the ethics of association. Solidarity, learned both on the factory floor and in college coursework, can point the way. What matters is breadth of experience and the openness to learn from it.

The term “patriarchy” is sometimes used to refer to systemic hierarchies of power in which gender is just one marker of inferiority. “Intersectionality” is a powerful conceptual tool for showing how differences in class and race function within and reinforce systemic patriarchal oppression. It may be that Addams’s understanding of “feudal” covers much of the conceptual territory now accorded to “patriarchy” and “intersectionality.” When feudalism is understood as an encompassing social system and the full penumbra of meanings associated with “feudal” are taken into account, Addams’s analysis of hierarchical power can be reconstructed.

While patriarchy, intersectionality, gender, race, and class are invaluable tools for analysis, they are abstractions. Unless used carefully, they can obscure evidence found by close examination of particular lives in particular situations. In Newer Ideals of Peace, Addams makes this point, speaking of socialists whom she accuses of “tak[ing] refuge in the formulae of a new scholasticism” when they ignore the enormous variety of predilections humans stubbornly hold. Addams writes, “Their orators are busily engaged in establishing two substitutes for human nature which they call ‘proletarian’ and ‘capitalist.’ . . . In time ‘the proletarian’ and ‘the capitalist’ will become the impedimenta which it will be necessary to clear away in order to make room for the mass of living and breathing citizens with whom self-government must eventually deal.”[139] Admittedly, thinking requires abstractions. Yet remember Eliot’s advice to attend to “the special circumstances that mark the individual lot.”[140] Scholars should take care that categories as useful as gender, race, and class do not themselves become impedimenta to nuanced observation and reasoning.

Used alone, no interpretive lens or theoretical framework is adequate for all cases. Addams and her fellow pragmatists think of theories as tools. Theories do not map the structure of the world as it really is; they do not mirror reality. They give patterns of thought helpful for critique and with which to suggest new hypotheses and imagine potential resolutions. In approaching morally troubling situations, pragmatists select the theories most suited to each particular case from among their repertoire.[141] In the essays discussed in the next chapter, Addams sets aside the historical axis from feudalism to association and selects a new pattern of evolutionary development more appropriate for the situations at hand.

Chapter 4

The City’s Moral Geology

In the 1890s, many morally troubling situations muddied the city’s landscape. The population was growing explosively as immigrants and rural Americans were drawn by employment prospects in factories, railways, and slaughterhouses. As local governments tried to keep step with changing demographics and employment needs, municipal corruption became endemic. Traditional charity organizations and the new social settlements could not keep pace as needs for basic provisions increased. This setting provides the geographical axis for “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption” and “The Subtle Problems of Charity,” published in 1898 and 1899. Addams later revised these essays as chapters in Democracy and Social Ethics titled “Political Reform” and “Charitable Effort.”

To deliberate about these social dislocations, Addams needed a much longer time line than she had used in previous essays. As the historical axis in these essays, she employs an anthropological account of moral evolution beginning with early human cultures and coming up to the present. Addams portrays the city as a layered moral geology, with some people still holding to an early form of morality, while others have advanced to sophisticated levels of moral reasoning. The penumbras of key terms, including “primitive,” “survivals,” “perplexity,” and even “science” itself, are full of evolutionary connotations. The most dominant voice in the chorus and the source of the historical axis is German physiologist and psychologist Wilhelm Wundt. Known as the founder of experimental psychology, Wundt established the world’s first experimental psychology laboratory at the University of Leipzig in 1879. He also became a leading scholar in the field of Völkerpsychologie, literally translated as “psychology of peoples.” His ten-volume study of cultures’ languages, myths, and customs gave a developmental, psychological history of humankind.[1] Addams’s voice lines echo and elaborate on passages from the very recently published English translation of his book Ethics: An Investigation of the Facts and Laws of the Moral Life. Showing how Addams’s voice lines play off of Wundt’s reveals that the level of Addams’s theorizing in these essays is more complex and sophisticated than has been recognized.

These variations of Addams’s method differ from earlier ones in several significant respects. In previous essays, Addams describes many of her immigrant neighbors, those who worked in factories, for example, as having caught the wave, the moral impulse of social dynamic change. She admits they likely were not conscious of the forces propelling them into the era of association and says little about the moral standards these immigrants consciously hold. By contrast, in “Ethical Survivals” and “Subtle Problems of Charity” Addams does not present immigrants as making moral progress at all. In fact, she places them at the lowest strata of the city’s moral geology. Yet she does not suggest that they need to advance to higher levels. Instead, she directs her critique at those already occupying higher moral strata, namely, political reformers and those practicing advanced techniques in charity administration. She chides them for condemning immigrants as corrupt and failing to take into account the immigrants’ sincerely held, albeit primitive, vision of the good. She calls for these reformers to extend tolerance, sympathy, and understanding to those beneath them on the moral evolutionary scale and thus create social cohesion that binds all moral strata together. Although Addams’s deliberations here are tied to the widely accepted evolutionary scale of moral progress, the essays represent a step toward the expansive appreciation of cultural differences she will articulate in the next two decades. In Addams’s later writings this point will become dominant as assumptions about history’s progressive impulse fade.

“Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption”

Hull House campaigned hard in 1896 and 1898 against Johnny Powers, alderman for Chicago’s Nineteenth Ward. After a decade on the city council, Powers had become its most powerful member and head of its Finance Committee. Known as “the Prince of the Boodlers,” he enriched his own pockets by granting rail and gas franchises worth millions to the “the Goliath of Graft,” Chicago’s resident robber baron, Charles Yerkes.[2] Within a decade of entering the railway business in 1886, Yerkes had taken control of the streetcar lines on the North and West Sides of Chicago. He built elevated tracks that encircled the “Loop,” as the city’s business district was known, and in the process amassed a multimillion-dollar fortune. Yerkes paid little attention to the public’s transit needs; his streetcars were unreliable, unsanitary, and unsafe.[3] Instead, Yerkes specialized in financial manipulation and controlling the so-called Gray Wolves of the city council, including Powers. Journalist Ray Stannard Baker, who was on his way to becoming one of the nation’s leading muckrakers, described Powers as the “political king” of Chicago. Powers, Baker declared, was “wholly unscrupulous” and ready to use “any of the treacheries known to corrupt politics.” Baker reported that in an interview Powers threatened, “Hull House will be driven from the ward and its leaders will be forced to shut up shop.”[4]

Addams had no illusions about Powers. In a letter to Henry Demarest Lloyd she described Yerkes and Powers as “the Briber and the Bribed.”[5] Addams had intimate knowledge of Powers’s treachery. He had thwarted her initially successful effort to wrest control of the ward’s garbage collection service from him. She and her neighbors lived daily with the fruits of his corrupt practices: disease-laden public water, filthy and unpaved streets, unsafe housing stock, inadequate public schools, and inflated streetcar fares.[6] During Hull House’s two campaigns to unseat Powers, Addams endured more than his public ridicule and his threats to force Hull House out of the ward. The story was carried nationally; the press attacked her, and she received obscene hate mail for her stance.[7] Powers won both elections and would continue as alderman until 1927.[8] Florence Kelley sharply disagreed with Addams’s decision to stop campaigning against political corruption. That, Kelly maintained, amounted to endorsing the political status quo. It contradicted Hull House’s founding pledge “to provide a centre for a higher civic and social life,” a pledge, Kelley asserted, that committed the residents to “make its protest on behalf of municipal honesty; and from that task it cannot turn back.”[9]

Addams approached political corruption from a different angle than Kelley by first trying to understand why the ward residents kept voting for Powers. Addams gave her analysis of the roots and persistence of municipal corruption in “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” a speech she gave before the April 1898 election in Ann Arbor, Philadelphia, and for Chicago’s Society for Ethical Culture and revised for the International Journal of Ethics.[10] Economist Richard Ely admired the speech, writing to Addams, “It seems to me that you go nearer to the bottom of things than almost anyone else who has written on the subject of municipal corruption. Your insight is wonderful.”[11] Abridged versions of the speech appeared in the Outlook, the Review of Reviews, and Public Opinion.[12] Historians commenting on the published versions of the speech correctly stress Addams’s explanation that Powers’s voters were not concerned with charges of corruption but supported him because he acted as their protector and friend.[13] In fact, Powers controlled the livelihoods of many of his supporters. They depended on him for patronage jobs and city licenses for their peddlers’ carts and shops. Powers cemented their loyalty by doling out gifts for family celebrations and “fixing” troubles with the police.[14]

Addams sees the problem of municipal corruption as emerging within an environment in which people hold to a mix of ethical standards that represent different evolutionary eras, creating a moral geology. That is, she views the present as a time in which the historical axis is replicated within the geographical one. In a passage Addams would later insert into The Long Road of Woman’s Memory, Scottish biologists Patrick Geddes and J. Arthur Thomson observe, “Our present social state is like a countryside with a complex geological structure, with outcrops of strata of very diverse ages.”[15] Addams does not regard her immigrant neighbors in the city’s Nineteenth Ward as naïve or manipulable in any straightforward sense. Instead, she claims, their moral sensibilities and cognitive capacities place them in a much earlier phase of human evolutionary history. This claim is the theoretical content contained within the penumbra of associations of the term “primitive.” These primitive moral practices are the ethical survivals Addams refers to in the essay’s title, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption.” Anthropologist Edward Burnett Tylor had introduced “survivals” as a term to refer to social practices that were once well adapted but had lingered on through subsequent social evolutionary changes. As the social habitat continued to evolve, these practices became maladapted and could lead to disequilibrium in the habitat.[16] Political reformers regarded these primitive survivals as a contributing source of municipal corruption and fertile ground for Powers and his cronies.

Addams struggled with how to refer to those among her immigrant neighbors she considered still at the level of primitive morality. In the speech she alternated among the “common people,” “unsophisticated,” “poorer people,” and “primitive” to refer to Powers’s constituents. In revising the speech transcript for publication, she cut a reference to how reformers’ “more civilized standard” might reach down to those of “a lower intelligence,” and simply refers to the reformers’ “later standard.”[17]

Here Addams faced more than the typical author’s struggle to find just the right words. As the end of the nineteenth century neared, “Anglo-Saxon” replaced “white” as the self-designation preferred by the dominant culture. Many Anglo-Saxons did not consider Irish, Italian, Greek, or eastern European Jewish and Slavic peoples as ethnic variations of a shared white identity but as representing distinct races. They considered them lazy, morally and intellectually inferior, and tending toward criminality and alcoholism.[18] Ray Stannard Baker’s language was more colorful than that of leading intellectual and political figures, but he expressed their sentiments precisely. He called these immigrants “offscourings,” representing the “poorest class” of immigrants. Ignorant of American ways, they were “capable of being herded and driven by anyone who is strong enough to wield the rod.”[19] Baker, along with many others, thought Powers manipulated his supporters, corrupting them just as Yerkes had corrupted him. Addams’s task was to find a way of understanding why these immigrants supported Powers while preserving their dignity.

Figure 4. He Won’t Be Reformed. Chicago Times-Herald, Mar. 5, 1898. Johnny Powers is retaliating against Hull House’s efforts to oust him from his seat as alderman to Chicago’s City Council. Courtesy of Chicago History Museum.

The key to understanding Addams’s analysis in “Ethical Survivals” is to see how she adapts Wundt’s account of morality’s evolutionary history to Chicago’s politics. She added this theoretical frame to the speech’s contents for the version published in the International Journal of Ethics. Clues to how Addams adapts his ideas to Chicago’s immigrant population are in a number of quotations and close paraphrases from Wundt’s Ethics that she inserts into the essay’s text. She attributes one quotation to Wundt and places quotation marks around another at the end of the article without identifying the author. Intermediary quotes and paraphrases are unattributed and unmarked. Addams removed Wundt’s name when she revised the essay for Democracy and Social Ethics.

Early in the essay Addams establishes the anthropological context for her analysis, writing, “In the scientific phrasing of Wundt, ‘the conclusion is inevitable that the idea of morality is at first intimately connected with the person and personal conduct, and that its severance from this substrata is a very slow and gradual process.’”[20] For early peoples, morality was concrete, tied to specific actions of specific individuals and encoded in customary practices. Millennia passed before people could conceive of abstract moral ideas such as justice or autonomy. Addams’s telling phrase, that her neighbors’ ethics were “determined much more by example than by precept” places them on the early side of this long process. In Wundt’s analysis, this characterizes the morality of primitive people in whom the cognitive ability to reason abstractly had not yet evolved and before morality and law had separated out from the all-embracing realm of custom.[21]

Addams highlights three characteristics of her neighbors’ morality, also stressed by Wundt, that identify it as primitive: it is attached to a personality, its conception of goodness is simple, and its grip is exceedingly strong. Common people acquire ethics, Addams writes, by way of a personality whom they consider worthy of admiration and emulation. In Wundt’s account of primitive morality, ideas of what is good and bad are contained in “the substrate of the moral personality.” That is, goodness is embodied in persons, be they tribal leaders, ancestors, or mythological gods that people are to admire, emulate, worship, and obey.[22] Forms of paying homage were encoded in customary social habits. The ward’s immigrant residents, Addams explains, simply take their customary admiration for these large personalities and transfer them to the dominant power in the neighborhood, alderman Johnny Powers. His wealth and his residence on “Con Row” were signs of his worthiness.[23]

Of course, living in urban, industrial Chicago was utterly unlike the rural, premodern settings from which many immigrants came. They left behind the old environmental cues that held moral customs in place. Wundt explains that a custom’s form and the feelings of obligation that attend it can linger on long after the original purpose and function of the custom have been unconsciously replaced by others. Addams makes this point with an unmarked quotation and a close paraphrase from Wundt. She observes, “Custom has a greater power of persistence than law or morality,” and “outward forms of conduct are apt to outlast the thought and feelings from which they sprang.”[24] Addams illustrates how the primitive moral custom of homage could persist in municipal politics by pointing out how her neighbors had experienced government before immigrating. For many of them, governments in their countries of origin did not function to promote the common good. Many Bohemians and Polish and Russian Jews, Addams notes, emigrated precisely to escape oppression and persecution from their imperial rulers. Her comments about the Irish are particularly significant because Powers and many of his fellow politicians were Irish, as was the majority of the Nineteenth Ward’s inhabitants before Addams moved into the neighborhood.[25] Addams explains that for centuries the Irish, as oppressed colonial subjects, experienced the British government as personified by “rapacious landlords.” Getting whatever they could from government, by whatever means they could find, was long considered a legitimate oppositional stance. Addams asks, “When we recall the heroic devotion and generous self-sacrifice of which the Irish race has always been capable, is it not clear that this sordidness and self-interest in regard to public affairs spring from their governmental experiences?”[26] Addams’s ringing defense stood in strong contrast to the widely held assumption that the Irish were incapable of governing honestly and “lack[ed] the solidity, the balance, the judgment, the moral staying power of the Anglo-Saxon.”[27]

Addams describes these immigrants’ idea of goodness as simple, concrete, and childlike. Their moral standards can be briefly stated as “being good to the poor and speaking gently of the dead.”[28] They are helpful to each other and willing to meet others’ needs even at considerable cost to their own scant resources. By describing Powers as a “stalking survival of village kindness,” Addams conveys her assessment that his mode of exhibiting kindness is a survival from an earlier era of moral evolution. The alderman is good to his constituents on a magnificent scale, as befitting a personality large enough and worthy enough for admiration.[29] Addams lists the alderman’s many forms of generosity. He bails his constituents’ errant children out of jail. He secures patronage jobs for one out of three voters in the ward. He celebrates birthdays, marriages, and holidays with generous gifts. At the previous Christmas, Addams recalls, Powers handed out “six tons of turkeys, and four or more tons of ducks and geese.”[30] An anonymous letter writer, signed only as “a voter,” excoriated Addams for going to such unwomanly lengths to unseat the “good, noble, and charitable” Johnny Powers.[31]

Addams’s stories about these immigrant neighbors reinforce her claim that they hold to a primitive morality. The specific customs she finds to be most significant to her neighbors match those Wundt attributes to people living in primitive societies. Addams spells out in detail her neighbors’ customs regarding death and adds, “At times one encounters almost the Greek feeling in regard to burial.” Wundt describes primitive Greek funereal practices at length.[32] Addams’s recollection that “early religious tithes were paid to ward off death and ghosts” echoes Wundt’s claim that primitive peoples believe “the souls of the dead hover over the dwellings of the living.”[33] Johnny Powers knew how important bereavement rituals were to his constituents. He paid for and attended their funerals, often inviting the mourning family to accompany him in his carriage.[34]

Scientists of the time agreed that the image of goodness as direct assistance to one’s acquaintances is indicative of primitive morality. Darwin writes that humans’ gregarious animal ancestors bequeathed this trait to their human descendants. This parallels Wundt’s claim that the trait is “rooted in an original endowment of the human mind.”[35] Spencer theorizes that early peoples’ “representative power” to think abstractly was weak. He correlates moral progress with humans’ ability to extend sympathy beyond members of their own social group. This comes at a “higher re-representative phase” when people acquire the cognitive ability to recognize obligations to abstract persons outside of their experience or to the community as whole.[36] When Addams writes, “The sense of just dealing comes apparently much later than the desire for protection and kindness,” she is referring to the scientists’ claim that justice emerges at a much later point in social evolution than does kindness.[37] She reinforces the point with an unmarked, unattributed quotation from Wundt, stating, “Morality develops far earlier in the form of moral fact than in the higher form of moral ideas.”[38] That is, people had practiced forms of morality long before they were able to articulate abstract moral principles. Once they become able to think abstractly, their task is to reshape and recalibrate their previous moral ideas to make them cohere with abstract ethical principles.

This gives Addams a lens through which to view her neighbors’ antipathy toward recent civil service reforms. The abstraction of impartial hiring, she notes, is beyond their powers of comprehension. When they first arrived in the United States, padrones found jobs for them, a gesture they took as a straightforward act of kindness and generosity.[39] They then simply transferred the padrones’ role to the alderman. To them, it is obvious that the alderman should give them jobs as a sign of friendship and goodness. To Powers’s supporters, the alderman’s actions fit right in line with the customs they had long accepted as moral.[40] Interpreted through Wundt’s analysis of moral evolution, Powers’s failure is in not putting boundaries on kindness, as justice requires of a public official.

Finally, Addams notes, custom’s grip on these immigrants is unusually strong, another sign of their adherence to primitive morality that Wundt also discusses. In two dense sentences she writes, “We must also remember that the imitative impulse plays an important part in life, and that the loss of social estimation, keenly felt by all of us, is perhaps most dreaded by the humblest. It is doubtless true that freedom for individual conduct, the power to give only due weight to the opinions of one’s neighbors, is one of the latest developments of civilization.”[41] Everyone is sensitive to his or her peers’ regard; primitive people are especially so because they inhabit a less evolved mental landscape. For them, the obligatory power of custom is undifferentiated. They lack the degree of freedom from social expectations that comes when moral and legal obligations are understood as separate from and more binding than the expectations of one’s peers. Attaining these separations is a slow evolutionary process and is, Wundt contends, “wholly and absolutely an achievement of civilization.”[42] Addams agrees. Once her neighbors had fastened their allegiance on Powers, his political standards became theirs. Addams adds, “It will take years to change the impression if the stamp is once fairly set.”[43]

Although Addams does not say this directly, she hints that Powers may share his supporters’ primitive morality. She notes his “undeveloped standards,” the same term she uses to describe her immigrant neighbors’ morality. She hypothesizes that perhaps Powers’s generosity is sincere. Sharing the same habit of regarding goodness simply as meeting the immediate needs and desires of his constituents, he may be unable to understand his own actions as corrupt. His cognitive powers may not be developed enough for him to understand that upholding political and legal standards of honesty are separate from and weightier than performing personal favors for his constituents.[44] If this is the case, Addams hypothesizes, Powers’s greed issues not from a deformed conscience but from an unevolved one. In Addams’s view, the very idea of political democracy is a recent evolutionary achievement, first articulated in the moral abstractions of individual rights and social contracts. The reformers’ understanding of honesty in politics rests upon an abstract conception of obligation to the community as a whole, one Powers and his constituents may lack the ability to grasp. Here, regardless of what Addams thought of Powers personally, in print she treats Powers as she had Pullman, giving him a generous interpretation in order to go beyond his personal failings and clear the way for a deeper analysis.

Addams’s use of Wundt’s theory to understand Powers’s supporters clarifies why Addams wanted to withdraw from local politics instead of pushing ahead as a matter of principle, as Kelley insisted. Addams may have thought the reformers’ efforts had crossed the point where development toward universal fellowship turns into a class struggle. This is the same point she had identified in “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement,” after which the settlement should no longer support the unions’ tactics. To push on would harden the battle lines and slow down progress that could only be attained through organic growth.[45] Addams does not view the conflict in terms of bad political practices versus good ones but as a clash between sincerely held images of the good. She points out how reformers repeatedly violate her neighbors’ moral sensibilities. They castigate saloons as sites where corrupt dealings transpire, not understanding that the neighborhood regards saloons as places of fellowship and hospitality.[46] When one reformer criticized a recently deceased alderman’s corrupt practices, he outraged the voters’ customary norm of “speaking gently of the dead.” Addams underscores these clashing conception of the good, noting, “If he considered them corrupt and illiterate voters, they quite honestly held him a blackguard.” To the ward’s voters, the reformer’s “goodness is not dramatic; it is not even concrete and human.” In the speech version of the essay, she adds, “It would not need to be glorious and flamboyant, but it must at least be incarnated before it can reach the lower intelligence.”[47] In the eyes of Powers’s supporters, reformers do not embody goodness in their persons and hence their announced principles do not deserve to be emulated.

Municipal corruption, Addams insists, does not issue from corrupt politicians and their supporters alone. Morally upright citizens and reformers bear their measure of responsibility. While reformers understand that political officials need to serve the public good, Addams charges that the ideas they preach exceed the standards by which they live. Here she gives the first hint of a “bourgeois” morality that occupies the same transitional niche as laissez-faire capitalism does in the evolutionary trajectory from feudalism to the era of association. These reformers hold their moral standards as “possessions,” to be used or set aside as convenient.[48] Because of their wealth they can live well without the alderman’s favors while avoiding the most disabling effects of corruption. They live far from unhealthy neighborhoods, arrange for private sanitation services, and buy clean, bottled water. However, corruption encircles them as well, though in an indirect and officially sanctioned form. The same business interests that lined Powers’s pockets in exchange for rail and gas franchises also donated generously to the university, where the children of upright citizens obtained a fine education.[49] Addams would make a similar comment a few months later about businesspeople who show great concern about working-class alcoholism but are indifferent to members of their own class who evade tax responsibilities and who “have lent themselves to debauching city councils and state legislatures in order to protect vested interests.” This, Addams insists, is “conscienceless citizenship.”[50]

With this Addams declares, “We are all involved in this political corruption, and as members of the community stand indicted. This is the penalty of a democracy,—that we are bound to move forward or retrograde together. None of us can stand aside, for our feet are mired in the same soil, and our lungs breathe the same air.”[51] Democracy requires far more than the reformers’ proclaimed principles of honesty in politics. It needs to be woven throughout every dimension of life.

Addams concludes with a call for a shared communal morality based on something more solid than commitment to cleaner politics. In contrast to earlier essays Addams does not ask that all Chicago citizens, whether primitive or sophisticated, adopt an ethics suited to the era of association. She simply accepts her community’s moral geology, seamlessly inserting an unmarked quotation from Wundt, writing, “Kinship of a common moral nature is the last and most comprehensive of all bases of union.”[52] For Wundt, this sense of kinship is the final, future stage of human moral development. This projection matches Addams’s vision in “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement” of a “communion of universal fellowship.”[53]

But Addams sees a more immediate need for a shared sense of kinship, one strong enough to overcome municipal corruption without reinforcing prejudices against Powers’s supporters. She proposes a different way of construing universal kinship. At the beginning of the essay she states, “All that holds us together—Latin, Celt, Teuton, Jew, and Slav, as we are—is our intrinsic human nature,—the few basic experiences which we hold in common.”[54] Experiences common to humans at every stage of evolution include our inherent need for each other as gregarious animals, our instincts, including sympathetic ones, and our shared vulnerabilities to suffering and death. She asks her audience, those sophisticated enough to read the International Journal of Ethics, first to “obtain a like sense of identification” with those they considered, in Baker’s words, “corrupted offscourings of inferior races,” before attempting to reform them. To press on without this sense of identification is “to walk straight toward the pit of self-righteousness.”[55] Obtaining this sense of identification would facilitate progress toward Wundt’s and Addams’s visions of universal kinship.

Addams’s crucial move in this essay is to reconceptualize and relocate what the problem fundamentally is. The problem, as Florence Kelley, municipals reformers, and much of the public understood it, is one of political corruption, rooted in the deadly sin of greed. In Addams’s reconstructed narrative, Powers and Yerkes become minor characters. She recenters the drama on her immigrant neighbors and the municipal reformers. Both groups are well meaning and basically honest in light of their own experience of life. Tensions arise because they hold to different conceptions of the good, which Addams attributes to their occupying different phases of moral evolution. Addams’s moral geology offers a way to appreciate widely varying conceptions of the good rather than condemning views that clash with one’s own. For those at higher strata, self-righteousness in oneself is a more threatening pit than corruption in others.

Democracy is not just a matter of cleaning up politics. In a democracy, sovereignty resides in the public, not in the politicians. Democracy is fundamentally a matter of the public taking responsibility for the health and well-being of the community as a whole. To take on this responsibility, members of the public must foster relations of sympathy and understanding with those who hold to differing conceptions of the good. In “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement” Addams places more responsibility on herself and those likewise educated and economically secure than on those living at survival’s edge. Similarly, in the three essays discussed in the previous chapter, the responsibility lies on the more affluent and powerful to enter into sympathetic relations with those under their authority. In this essay Addams again places the greatest responsibility on the municipal reformers and their social class to enter into sympathetic relations with Powers’s supporters. In Addams’s understanding of democracy, such relations of sympathy and understanding are prerequisite to any genuinely democratic response to social dislocations.

Addams delivered the speech several months before the April 1898 election. Attaining a lived sense of kinship based on our “intrinsic moral nature” was a bigger project than could be achieved by election day. Her only recommendation for reform candidates is a vague suggestion to appeal to her neighbors’ “big emotional ethics” by finding ways to dramatize “public spirit.”[56] William Salter, head of Chicago’s Society for Ethical Culture, evidently knew something of the theater. In an otherwise laudatory letter, he asked Addams, “How are we to have the dramatic force on the side of good equal to that on the side of evil?”[57] To this Addams had no answer. She knew the enormity of the task ahead and had too much respect for her immigrant neighbors’ suffering to offer facile solutions. In one of the essay’s most poignant passages, Addams reflects on a working-class young man who, she admits, knew he was gaming the system. She writes, “The situation revealed once more the difficulty of attaining virtue by those hardest pressed in the industrial struggle; and in the revelation the writer felt the familiar grip that silences us all in the presence of temptations which have never been ours.”[58] Addams had the courage to dwell in the silence of that grip.

“The Subtle Problems of Charity”

Addams’s analysis of the administration of charity in “The Subtle Problems of Charity” complements her discussion of political corruption. In this essay, published in the February 1899 issue of Atlantic Monthly, Addams employs the same moral geology as in “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption.” Wundt’s anthropological account of moral evolution from primitive times to the present again provides the historical axis. In this variation Addams’s analysis draws on evolutionary content located in the penumbras of key terms, particularly “perplexity” and “science.” She uses this content to show how those at the higher strata of moral development in the city’s moral geology still fall short. As in “The College Woman and the Family Claim,” Addams points out how the path to moral development is fraught with ambiguities, even for those who are well intentioned and emotionally sensitive to others. The best way to proceed is to walk humbly with the poor, in spite of uncertainty.

The immediate context for Addams’s analysis involves tensions among those working for the Charity Organization Society (COS) and those affiliated with social settlements. Both types of organization took form in London in the latter part of the nineteenth century. Concerned by the inefficient and uncoordinated ways that religiously motivated alms were distributed in the city, the COS created a registry of donors and potential recipients in order to bring scientific methods to the administration of charity. They also trained “friendly visitors” who were to establish friendships with poor families and inculcate virtues of hard work and thrift in them. The visitors’ assessment of the families’ work ethic determined whether they deserved charitable relief. Many cities in the United States replicated the pattern by setting up their own charity organization societies.[59]

Initially, the COS orientation toward reforming individual families contrasted with the social settlements’ aim of addressing the conditions that led to poverty. People in both camps tended to emphasize their differences. Settlement workers early on accused the COS of perpetuating the hierarchal pattern of noblesse oblige of the rich toward the poor. Settlement residents considered themselves democratic, dwelling among the poor as neighborly fellow citizens. In fact, relations between charity organization societies and social settlements were fluid, and cooperation between them increased over time.[60] Many individuals were associated with both. Julia Lathrop, a Vassar-educated lawyer, became a resident of Hull House shortly after it opened. Her principal interest was improving the administration of charity, and she often used COS methods.[61] Addams and Lathrop served together on the board of the Chicago Bureau of Charities. In 1905 the leading journals of the COS and of social settlements merged; in 1909 Addams was elected president of the National Conference of Charities and Corrections.[62] Addams included books by Mary Richmond and Amos Warner, both leaders in the COS movement, in the bibliography for her 1899 University of Chicago lectures.[63]

Addams wrote “The Subtle Problems of Charity” at the midpoint of the two-decade-long movement from suspicion to cooperation. She tells the story of a charity visitor, whom she describes as “a young college woman, well-bred and open-minded.”[64] The visitor’s encounters with her clients bring her endless perplexities. Why should she stress that her clients be self-supporting when she is dependent on her family’s wealth? How can she admonish her clients not to marry young or send their children to work when she sees many working men “laid upon the shelf by thirty-five” who need children capable of supporting them?[65] She recognizes that she would be unable to cope with the challenges her clients face daily. She comes to realize that her own social standing and economic well-being are parasitic on her parents. Her own ethical standards and those of the Charity Organization Society depend upon opportunities available to affluent families, standards she now realizes are “incorrigibly bourgeois.”[66] These perplexities are more than intellectual puzzles. To her they are “incredibly painful” and she “feels the sordidness of constantly being obliged to urge the industrial view of life.”[67] Some charity workers, Addams comments, cannot tolerate the strain, and they stop visiting the poor. Others move into tenements and, like religious sisters, takes vows of poverty. This charity visitor, however, continues. She has become attached to a particular family with a disabled child. Her sympathetic instincts, now activated by their presence, give her the motive power to carry on, though the perplexities do not cease.[68]

The moral standards the charity visitor initially holds, Addams writes, are “individual” and “industrial.” They are not timeless moral standards but historical survivals, inherited from an earlier generation. The charity visitor’s grandmother, Addams notes, “could have done the industrial preaching very well, because she did have the industrial virtues,” ones she had honed into “housewifely accomplishments.”[69] Addams goes on to elaborate how in the past the virtues of industriousness, thrift, self-denial, and independence of spirit led to material success. The same independent spirit, if displayed by late nineteenth-century factory workers, was apt to get them fired.[70]

This contrast reflects the striking changes in work patterns that took place during the nineteenth century. The charity visitor’s grandmother could have met COS expectations. She likely had lived as many white families had in northern and midwestern states in the first half of the nineteenth century. The family, not the individual, was the primary economic unit. Most families made their living as farmers, merchants, and craftspeople who worked at home or in their nearby shops. While tasks were often assigned by gender, it was clear that every family member’s work was essential to the family’s economic well-being. The family’s labor was its own and conferred dignity. Working for others for wages was considered a temporary and morally inferior stage of life, preparatory to becoming an independent farmer or shop owner.[71] In an economy largely structured in this way, ethical prescriptions to work hard, be thrifty, and aim for economic self-sufficiency made sense. But as large factories were introduced in the latter part of the nineteenth century, wage labor became a lifelong rather than a temporary status. Class lines between professionals who worked with their intellects and wage earners who worked with their hands became pronounced, and the earning potential for the two classes diverged. For many families, it was impossible to attain self-sufficiency, no matter how “industrial,” or industrious, they were.

The charity visitor experienced this transition as an internal, psychological clash that pitted the moral standards she had internalized with their obvious unsuitability for her clients’ situation. “Perplexity” is a fitting term with which to convey her confusion. At the time, “perplexity” carried the connotation of feeling entangled within a particularly knotty situation.[72] Educated people of the era encountered many perplexities. To British writer John Harold, the “plethora of grain” stockpiled in US ports was “a subject of much perplexity.” To writer Elizabeth Stuart Phelps, “our worst perplexity” was how to prevent marriages in which brutality, drunkenness, and infidelity might subsequently occur. Biblical scholar Harlan Creelman writes that Job and the Psalmist experienced great perplexity as they pondered why the righteous suffer and the wicked prosper.[73] The feeling of perplexity Addams explores in this essay corresponds to what Dewey later describes as the first step of the logic of inquiry.[74] One cannot begin to formulate alternative resolutions because one does not know how to sort through the situation.

Theorists located the capacity to experience perplexity as a relatively late evolutionary acquisition. That is, the word’s penumbra located the term at an advanced stage of moral evolution. Giddings writes that birds, bees, and fish, functioning under the “instinctive economy,” construct complex dwellings by instinct. These animals do not deliberate about methods of construction; there is no conscious adaptation of means to ends.[75] Humans, functioning within the “rational economy,” use reason to adapt more flexibly to their environment. Doing so, however, “is marked by perplexity, by doubt, by experimentation and the slow, painful process of discovery.”[76] Philosopher and psychologist G. F. Stout gave the term a more precise designation. Perplexities arise when an experience calls up two contrary conceptual mappings; the ability to do this requires considerable cognitive sophistication. Those with “comparatively undeveloped consciousness” use cognition to address practical needs, and they lack the cognitive capacity to experience perplexities.[77] These evolutionary analyses stand in contrast to the security promised by Enlightenment conceptions of reason: if only people would reason correctly, truth, justice, happiness, and good social order would follow. Victorian intellectuals valued reason as an evolutionary product, but their experience of reason was accompanied by deep and disturbing doubt. John Morley expresses this sense, writing, “It was the age of science, new knowledge, searching criticism, followed by multiplied doubts and shaken beliefs.”[78] Educated people, caught in the swirling, changing conceptions of science, religion, and ethics, felt keenly the loss of cultural solidity.[79]

Addams does not attribute perplexities to the charity visitor’s clients, although they are mightily confused by the visitor’s prescriptions. They assess her actions, Addams writes, from their “primitive view of life.”[80] Why does the charity visitor refuse them shoes when she has so many pairs? Why does she withhold the medicine and money they so obviously need?[81] By withholding, the charity visitor violates the immigrants’ standard of spontaneous kindness and instinctive pity. This standard serves them, Addams notes with an unattributed quote from Darwin, “as a rude rule of right and wrong.” Darwin regards this “rude rule” as an inheritance from our animal ancestors.[82] As when discussing the voters who supported Johnny Powers, Addams incorporates Wundt’s account of primitive morality into her portrayal of the clients’ ethics, sometimes in quite precise ways. For example, Wundt traces an evolutionary development in decorative practices, applied first to the body, then to clothing, and later to the interior of the home. Addams comments that the charity visitor recognizes her clients are following a “primitive and undeveloped” standard when they show far more interest in their own clothing than in home interior decorating.[83]

The charity visitor’s clients are greatly upset by her financial inquisitions. Such probing, one remarks, “never gave me anything but a bad character.”[84] Her clients cannot comprehend the abstract scale with which the charity visitor measures their worthiness. At least, as Addams observes in “Ethical Survivals,” the corrupt politician does not follow the “nagging rules of the charitable societies” when he hands out Christmas turkeys.[85] Why should the clients put their last pennies in a savings account rather than spending them on toys their children so visibly enjoy? Wundt and Addams interpret this response by noting how important games are for primitive people.[86] The immigrants’ primitive morality had served them well in their villages of origin, and in their new habitat they are deeply disturbed by their inability to meet the expectations of powerful agencies such as the COS. This disequilibrium, Addams observes, sometimes leads to “moral deterioration.” Finding it impossible to meet the charity visitor’s ethical standards, her clients learn to game the system. This weakens the ethical customs they do have and diminishes their spontaneous displays of pity and compassion.[87]

Addams herself experiences perplexity over the clash between COS standards and those of social settlements.[88] Her perplexity, however, is more intellectually complex than the charity visitor’s. The charity visitor is perplexed by the incongruity between the ethical standards she shares with the COS and those of her clients. Addams is perplexed by the incongruity between the COS standards and those she imagines will be suitable to a democratic social equilibrium. Addams diagnoses the source of her perplexity by assessing the COS’s claim to employ scientific methods in its practice of charity. The problem, Addams finds, is that these methods are not scientific enough because they are not based on evolutionary principles. The COS practices taxonomy as it classifies, organizes, and tabulates its clients’ data. Of the use of taxonomy in biology and geology, Addams comments, “All this happened before science had become evolutionary and scientific at all,—before it had a principle of life from within.”[89] The COS taxonomic method is limited because it is concerned only with people’s present condition and does not take the historic, evolutionary view. Addams considers this “pseudo-scientific,” because it ignores the “ethical epochs” to which people belong.[90] Because the charity visitor’s clients are in the epoch of primitive morality, it is unscientific to use abstract principles of desert to assess moral worthiness. The same critique could be applied to the principles for clean government that the municipal reformers advocated.

Addams’s critique reflects how scientists of the time used evolutionary reasoning to think about the emergence of the modern sciences. That is, the penumbra of the term “science” contained evolutionary content. Geologist Joseph Le Conte gives an evolutionary reading of Auguste Comte’s well-known hierarchy of the sciences by putting their emergence into chronological order: mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, anthropology, and finally sociology. Le Conte continues by examining subsets of biology and sociology more closely in terms of explanatory power. With taxonomy, scientists compare organisms as they currently exist. With the ontogenic method, developmental stages of a given organism are compared. The phylogenic method has the most explanatory power, as it traces and compares organisms’ evolution through historical epochs.[91]

Addams is seeking scientific principles for charity administration based on the phylogenic, or fully historical, point of view that take into account the clients’ “ethical epoch.” Methods of providing relief based on such principles would then be fully scientific, in keeping with evolutionary principles of growth. She tries to hold her mind “open to receive every suggestion which growth implies,” but she cannot reason her way out of the perplexity.[92] She feels entangled in “the complexity of the situation.” She is repulsed by the idea of “organizing” emotions under abstract rules; it is inhumane to withhold relief from those who need it but cannot meet COS criteria. Yet she also admits that pity is capricious and needs “the dignity of conscious duty,” as the COS standards provide.[93] Addams acknowledges that COS methods, although “pseudo-scientific,” are still needed, writing, “The trouble is that the ethics of none of us are clearly defined, and we are continually obliged to act in circles of habit based upon convictions which we no longer hold.”[94] It is not hypocritical to do so; the situation of living at a transitional moment makes it necessary. Elements of the hierarchical nature of charitable administration will continue to be needed during this time of disequilibrium in the social organism. Although Hull House and other social settlements described their relations with their neighbors as democratic enactments of the duties of citizenship, Addams knows the character of their relationship depends on the situation at that historical moment. The relationship cannot be made fully democratic through the residents’ intentions and actions alone but hinges on greater systemic changes outside their control.

The most Addams can do is give what she calls “the suggestion of a principle” to hold onto while experiencing the “inevitable discomfort” that will accompany her and other would-be reformers through the transition to a democratic social equilibrium. This suggestion of a principle is essentially the same as she gave to Pullman in “A Modern Tragedy” and to the young educated woman’s parents and to Francis’s father in “The College Woman and the Family Claim.” She and her colleagues in reform “may have to share these perplexities before they feel themselves within the grasp of a principle of growth, working outward from within; before they can gain the exhilaration and uplift which come when the individual sympathy and intelligence are caught in the forward, intuitive movement of the mass.”[95] Scientists who study humans are inside the social habitat along with those they study; there is no external position from which to carry out their observations. To proceed scientifically, would-be reformers of municipal politics and of charity administration must place themselves inside the principle of growth as well. As organisms inside an evolving habitat, they too will experience growth’s strains, knowing that they cannot predict outcomes in advance.

Addams reinforces this “suggestion of a principle” by translating into evolutionary terms the prophet Micah’s call “to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.”[96] COS workers, with their abstract rules of desert, attempt to “do justly” but squelch their own sympathetic instincts while doing so. Her neighbors with their primitive morality “love mercy,” although its application is capricious. “To walk humbly with God,” Addams suggests, means to walk with “the lowliest of his creatures,” with no assurance that the perplexities will ever be resolved. During times of disequilibrium, situations are chaotic and morally problematic, and their future is not yet determinable. Meanwhile, we must walk “with the pangs and misgivings to which the poor human understanding is subjected whenever it attempts to comprehend the meaning of life.”[97]

Addams’s advice to walk humbly prescribes more than just the attitude the economically secure should take toward the poor. She also says to “walk,” that is, to act in spite of uncertainty. In a talk on the Arts and Crafts movement, Addams warns against being so concerned with tidying up one’s theories that one ignores conditions that need amelioration.[98] To require clarity of thought before attending to others’ immediate needs, to withdraw for fear of bungling, is to enter the pit of self-righteousness.

Addams does not resolve her perplexity in this essay, nor was it possible to do so. A tidier resolution would have been premature, and in Addams’s mind, scientifically dishonest. The immediacy and magnitude of the needed relief could only be met through philanthropy’s hierarchical structure, much as settlement workers might wish it otherwise. In times of social dynamic transition, ambiguities in thought and action cannot be eliminated. The evidence with which to formulate resolutions does not yet exist. It awaits social evolution’s future developments to bring it into existence.

*

Addams’s conclusions in “Ethical Survivals” and “Subtle Problems” contrast so strongly in tone that it is easy to overlook how similar they are. “Ethical Survivals” ends with Wundt’s triumphal summation that evolution is moving toward the realization of universal kinship. “Subtle Problems” concludes with the need “to walk for many dreary miles” with “pangs and misgivings.” In these essays, however, Addams is posing a deeper question than how to clean up municipal politics or reform COS standards. Using Wundt’s account of the evolution of morality, she has shown how distances between people based on social class, educational attainment, or cultures of origin should not be perceived as oppositional in terms of right versus wrong or good versus bad. Evolutionary history demonstrates continuity rather than division. Addams’s question, to which both essays give the same answer, is how to carry on during times of disequilibrium when perplexities cannot yet be resolved. Addams places the responsibility on those who see themselves as ethically more advanced to try to understand those less advanced to the extent possible. While inside the present situation’s confusion, one is to proceed by enacting the truth of universal kinship and walking alongside the lowliest members of humanity.

Pause a moment to recognize how remarkable Addams’s stance was at the time. Intellectuals, politicians, and rabble-rousers all used class and cultural differences to elevate Anglo-Saxons over recent southern and eastern European immigrants, African Americans, and supposedly primitive peoples throughout the world. Francis A. Walker, president of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, used recent immigrants’ alleged primitive morality as a reason to legally prohibit them from entering the country at all. Harvard philosopher Josiah Royce thought these immigrants were at least capable of assimilating to Anglo-Saxon culture and insisted that the nation was in danger if they did not do so. The Chinese, he thought, were incapable of assimilation, and he supported their exclusion.[99] Using the same social evolutionary discourse as her fellow intellectuals, Addams came to the opposite conclusion and advocated sympathetic identification with these so-called primitive groups rather than suspicion and exclusion.

In writing “Ethical Survivals” and “Subtle Problems of Charity” Addams may have made use of Scottish philosopher Edward Caird’s writings to help her understand the city’s new immigrants. In the bibliography for her 1899 University of Chicago lectures, Addams lists Caird’s The Evolution of Religion under “General Ethics,” along with texts by Wundt and Mazzini.[100] She visited Caird in 1896 and reflects in Twenty Years at Hull-House on how his book gave her “unspeakable comfort” as she tried to understand her immigrant neighbors, although she does not specify what she found comforting in it.[101] Caird recasts Hegelian idealism in evolutionary dress. He arranges the ethical and religious practices of historical and present-day cultures in order of evolutionary development and shows how later ones emerged organically from preceding ones.[102] Past ethical practices and understandings should not be rejected as false but understood as “partial and germinating truths.”[103] Caird argues that the principle of “the unity of mankind” need not be posited any longer solely as religious or metaphysical dogma; his evolutionary ordering confirms this unity scientifically.[104] Asserting the principle is not enough. Fortunately, the evolutionary principle of development itself gives “motive-power” to undertake the extensive activities needed to understand it fully and truly.[105] Caird writes, “This principle makes us conscious that we have not solved the scientific problem suggested by the lives of other men till we are able to live them over again, to reproduce their movement in living imagination, and to repeat in conscious thought the unconscious logic of their growth.”[106] Doing this requires minute investigation of the facts of others’ lives and immersing one’s sympathetic imagination into their thoughts and feelings. Addams’s knowledge of her immigrant neighbors can be understood as the result of carrying out Caird’s recommended method of scientific investigation.

For Addams, as for Caird, sympathy is methodological.[107] Forming sympathetic connections gives a way to hold on through the confusion and perplexities of organic growth. Walking many dreary miles with the lowliest members of humanity activates scientific investigators’ sympathetic instincts, placing them in a position to know fellow travelers in a highly concretized, granular way. Addams goes beyond Wundt and Caird in spelling out the implications for scientific investigators who engage in this process. There is no neutral, objective point from which to obtain this understanding. It can only be acquired when one is inside the process, experiencing the confusions and perplexities that evolutionary growth brings, and having one’s own self changed in the process. Addams’s physical image that we all breathe the same air and are mired in the same mud is not merely metaphoric; her evolutionism is earthy.[108] Addams does not share Caird’s Hegelian idealism. That the source of morality for Addams as for Darwin is our social instincts makes the unity of all humanity earthy as well.

In “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption” and “The Subtle Problems of Charity” a new configuration of Addams’s understanding of democracy emerges. Granted, Addams repeats the language of being “caught into the forward, intuitive movement of the mass.”[109] But she does not pair this evolutionary movement with calls for everyone to rise together into the era of association. She does not ask her immigrant neighbors to move to a higher level of morality. Instead, she seeks paths toward social cohesion and healing among those of vastly different cultural and economic locations.

For today’s readers, Addams’s scientific reasoning is obscured by her storytelling. One could ask, Why did she write “The Subtle Problems of Charity” for the Atlantic Monthly, whose readers expected vivid narratives, rather than writing a more straightforward account for, say, the American Journal of Sociology or the International Journal of Ethics? In a letter to Vida Scudder, Addams hints at a reason. Scudder taught English at Wellesley College and was a founder of the College Settlement Association.[110] Addams wrote how much she appreciated Scudder’s book Social Ideals in English Letters, which she also included in her 1899 bibliography. English Letters gives an account of how evolutionary growth moved through English literature in the nineteenth century. Addams comments that the book helped her with an article on trade unions, noting, “It is going to interpret to hundreds of people who never could catch the economics point of view.”[111] Addams wanted to appeal beyond an academic audience to a wider reading public; her rhetorical skills enabled her to communicate with different audiences simultaneously. Those attuned to scientific theorizing could find her reasoning behind the stories. For others, the stories carried the same argument but in an accessible and engaging form.

Using Wundt’s and Caird’s theoretical frames enabled Addams to probe more deeply and scientifically than today’s scholars have recognized. Some ask, though, whether Addams’s descriptions of her neighbors as primitive indicate that her attitudes toward them were biased and condescending.[112] Given that Wundt’s and Caird’s analyses of moral evolution are thoroughly outdated, one might well ask if Addams’s response of identifying her neighbors with anthropologically remote, cognitively immature ancestors shows any less bias than thinking of them as easily corrupted by unprincipled politicians or charity visitors uninformed about the evolution of morality. I will not defend Addams’s conclusions about her neighbors. It is fair, though, to raise the question of how far thinkers, no matter how innovative, can jettison the intellectual currents of their day. Descartes, known as the father of modern philosophy, wrote texts littered with the medieval scholasticism of his Jesuit education.[113] Newton pursued alchemy and astrology as vigorously as he did modern physics.[114] Addams entered fully into the social evolutionary theorizing of her time; today’s scholars should recognize this, however uncomfortable it makes them. However, accusations of bias, even if justified, can also function to block a nuanced understanding of a historical figure’s reasoning.

What Addams accomplishes in “Ethical Survivals” and “Subtle Problems of Charity” is to develop an appreciative account of cultural pluralism. She did so a decade before Franz Boas published The Mind of Primitive Man and nearly two decades before Randolph Bourne and Horace Kallen published their stunning essays on cultural pluralism.[115] In Addams’s variations, pluralism is still attached to the spine of progressive social evolution. As Darwin points out, much variation emerges within a species before the varied organisms evolve into separate species. In the late 1890s Addams’s pluralism had not yet detached from the dominant view of moral evolution as progressive. Her critiques of political and charitable reformers, while attached to that view, also weakens it. Thinking proceeds the way evolution does, often stepwise and contingent on changes outside the thinking process. This rarely happens quickly. The concepts and key terms through which thinking proceeds carry penumbras of association that enable survivals of previous modes of thought to persist. Addams’s thinking was not static. In the next decade assumptions of evolutionary progress will fade from her thought as her commitment to cultural pluralism becomes more pronounced.

Set within the discourse of social evolutionary theorizing of her time, Addams’s intellectual moves can be identified with precision. Her challenge was to articulate robust conceptions of democracy and equality without recourse to Enlightenment conceptions of liberty and equality grounded in natural, moral rights or individual autonomy. With others in the discourse, Addams thought these ideas were anachronistic survivals of an earlier era. The challenge was to articulate a conception of democracy that appreciated human capacities, while remembering that we are gregarious animals with mind and morals only partially and faultily evolved, coping within ever-changing physical and social environments. Addams’s call for sympathetic identification with supposedly primitive people does not depend upon abstract notions of human equality. It emerged through sharing filthy streets, polluted air, and good fellowship with people whose ways of life differed vastly from her own. Addams’s conclusions about how to carry on during times of rapid social change demonstrate her creative use of empirical data and theoretical materials and provides an example of the flexibility and breadth of social evolutionary theorizing.

Chapter 5

Educating Immigrants

In her analyses of political corruption and the administration of charity discussed in the previous chapter, Addams worked through these social dislocations as far as she could but was left perplexed about how to proceed. She assigns to people like herself, educated and economically secure, the responsibility to bring those at the primitive level of morality into full inclusion in the democratic polity but says little about how to do that. The essays discussed in this chapter show Addams experimenting with ways to carry out that responsibility. In “Foreign-Born Children in the Primary Grades,” an address to the National Educational Association, Addams diagnoses the inadequacies of current educational offerings for immigrant children and gives some general guidelines for reform. In a manuscript, “First Outline of a Labor Museum at Hull-House, Chicago” Addams develops a specific curriculum that carries out her recommendations. She would later revise these essays for the chapter in Democracy and Social Ethics titled “Educational Methods.” Although the chapter does not mention the Labor Museum, it is essentially a generalized version of Addams’s proposal for the museum. The museum was expressly designed to meet the educational needs of immigrant adults who worked in factories and for their children who likely would share the same fate. Portions of Addams’s 1899 address “A Function of the Social Settlement” supplement these writings on education.

The maladjustment of available educational offerings to the particular needs of immigrant families provides the geographical axis for this variation of Addams’s method. For the historical axis Addams uses the history of industry, defined broadly as the story of how humans over time have shaped nature’s materials in order to sustain physical and social life. This history provides the content for Addams’s recommendations for curricular reform and serves as the organizing principle for the Labor Museum’s design. Drawing out Addams’s deliberations in this variation demonstrates how her understanding of education incorporates patterns of evolutionary reasoning and is expansively democratic. While scholars have done impressive work exploring Addams’s ideas about education, this analysis shows how Addams’s understanding of education’s role issues from her organic and expansive vision of democracy.[1]

Southern Italian Immigrant Children and the Public Schools

Addams began her address “Foreign-Born Children in the Primary Grades” modestly enough. She was one of very few plenary speakers at the National Educational Association’s 1897 convention who was not a school administrator. The administrators gave progress reports. They told of recent achievements and of their efforts to meet specific challenges. In deference to the audience, Addams acknowledges she is not a teacher and so will merely offer “observations and reflections . . . in the hope that they may prove suggestive.”[2] Addams tells her audience that she will confine her remarks to observations of children of southern Italian immigrant parents who would spend only a few years in the public school’s primary grades before entering a lifetime of factory work. In the address she reflects on what sort of education should be offered these children, given these parameters. Her response does not contain the expansive visions or pride of accomplishment with which other speakers regaled the audience.[3] Unlike them, Addams says nothing about how democracy’s survival depends on the schools to produce citizens capable of running a government of, by, and for the people.[4] In fact, Addams exposes the lie in their aspirational democratic vision by observing that the schools in fact train children quite well for a future of repetitive, mind-numbing factory work. Addams indicates her contrasting vision of education by concluding that what these children need from the school is “some off-set to [the factory’s] monotony and dullness; some historic significance of the part [they are] taking in the life of the commonwealth; some conception of the dignity of labor.”[5]

Addams was right to bring her concerns about southern Italian immigrant children to the National Educational Association. Most of these children attended public schools. Although their families were Catholic, they had little interest in Chicago’s parochial schools, which were largely controlled by Irish Catholics.[6] Addams knew these families well. Of the seventeen Italian clusters in Chicago, the largest was in the Nineteenth Ward, making up one-third of the immigrant population in Hull House’s neighborhood.[7] From 1880 onward, the majority of Italians who immigrated to the United States came from southern Italy and faced the same prejudice as other immigrants from southern and eastern Europe. Educators sometimes perpetuated these prejudices in an explicit way. Stanford University professor of education Ellwood P. Cubberley describes these groups as “illiterate, docile, lacking in self-reliance and initiative, and not possessing the Anglo-Teutonic conceptions of law, order, and government.” He continues, “Their coming has served to dilute tremendously our national stock, and to corrupt our civic life.”[8] Immigrants from southern Italy were considered particularly troublesome. Respected academic figures, highly placed political officials, and much of the public regarded northern and southern Italians as distinct races. Sociologist E. A. Ross explains that while northern Italians have a goodly dose of northern European blood in them, those in the South hold “Greek, Saracen, and African blood.” Northern Italians, Ross comments, are “well-fitted for citizenship.” Those from southern Italy, however, are not well suited, as they are far less literate, less artistic, and far more criminally inclined. He adds, “It is the backward and benighted provinces from Naples to Sicily that send us the flood of ‘gross little aliens.’”[9]

Addams’s respectful portrayal of rural village life in southern Italy stands in sharp contrast to these widely held beliefs. She presents the village, which constituted the immigrants’ geographical axis before emigrating, as a social organism in healthy equilibrium and the children’s parents as skillful peasants. They spent much of their time outdoors, working directly with the materials nature provides. Before emigrating they farmed, tended olive groves, made their own tools, grew and ground wheat and turned it into bread, spun wool into thread and wove it into cloth. They maintained strong social ties with their extended families. The parents’ skills were in large measure an inheritance from their ancestors, a heritage they expected to pass on to their children. This transmission took place through their hands in concert with their intellects. As their children played and worked alongside their parents, they gained an education that was fully integrated into daily life.

Thus the premodern Italian village, as Addams describes it, is a social organism in stable equilibrium that fulfills her definition of education: “The ultimate aim [of education] is to modify the character and conduct of the individual, and to harmonize and adjust his activities; . . . [and to] aim to give the child’s own experience a social value.”[10] Children in these villages have an immediate understanding of the “social value” of what they are taught. They quickly learn how to “harmonize and adjust their activities” within the village’s social equilibrium. The key terms of Addams’s definition—character and conduct, harmonizing and adjusting, and giving experience a social value—were familiar to her audience. Other speakers used them frequently; they functioned almost as platitudes in educational circles.[11] Throughout her address Addams strips away the hazy gloss from these platitudes and gives them meanings her audience may not have anticipated.

These rural peasants are jolted, Addams continues, when they emigrate from a stable social organism into one thrown into disequilibrium by forces of social dynamic change. At the moment the immigrants entered the new country, they became time travelers. Their geographical axis of the village was stripped of its immediacy and transformed into an antiquated past. The cultural patterns and skills that had given meaning to their lives and knit them into the social fabric instantly became irrelevant. Instead of using their intelligence and creativity to turn nature’s materials into life-sustaining forms, they have to “earn” a living by performing unskilled, repetitive tasks. They experience this loss as disorienting and demeaning. Their children need the school to function as a bridge connecting their experiences within the family to the capabilities that will enable them to become contributing members of their new social environment.[12]

Instead, the school compounds the jolt. Addams describes how students are required to sit quietly and decipher abstract symbols of a language foreign to them. The parents in most cases cannot read and hadn’t needed literacy skills in their village of origin.[13] The children’s few years in school will not give them the level of proficiency needed to extend their knowledge of the world through reading.[14] The most devastating lesson the school teaches these children, Addams concludes, is contempt. By expecting them to act like American children, the teachers unwittingly convey contempt for the sources of meaning these children bring to the classroom, that is, their parents and their parents’ culture and historic traditions.[15] The school’s failure to give these children’s “own experience a social value” becomes Addams’s mantra. The children do not develop “a consciousness of [their] social value”; they do not gain “knowledge of the social meaning of [their] work”; they do not come to know “the value of the social service” they will contribute.[16] The one exception Addams mentions proves her point. She recounts how one boy was eager to learn arithmetic so he could do the accounts for his father’s store. In this case the boy’s family life outside school gave meaning to the activities inside it.[17]

Some of these students reacted by turning truant. Recently passed legislation requiring school attendance up to the age of fourteen and prohibiting child labor before that age was rarely enforced.[18] Addams describes how the bustle of city streets is far more alluring to these children than a schoolroom desk. As they lurch from one attraction to another, they never learn basic skills their parents have in abundance, needed to undertake tasks in a “temperate, laborious, and painstaking” manner.[19] Some children turn to petty juvenile crime mostly for the adventure of it. Addams counters the widely held belief that immigrants from southern Italy are innately criminal, stating flatly, “These boys are not of criminal descent, nor vagrant heritage.”[20]

Some of the children remain in school until they can take factory jobs. For such a child, Addams asks, “Has anything been done . . . to give him a consciousness of his social value . . . [and adapt him] to deal more effectively and in a more vital manner with his present life?”[21] Her question cuts, because it lays bare the absurdity of the situation. Addams is asking the schools what they can do to better prepare these children for a life of “senseless drudgery.” She is asking them how they can better inure the children to work that has no intrinsic interest or meaning, work that will make them so dulled that even the social settlement’s offerings of night classes and social entertainments cannot compensate.

Giving her inquiry an ironic twist, Addams claims that the schools in fact already prepare these children exquisitely for their future lives as factory workers. She asserts, “The school itself is an epitome of the competitive system, almost of the factory system.” In the eyes of employers, the ideal worker is one whose “activities become inevitably perfectly mechanical,” well suited for tasks of “senseless drudgery.”[22] The primary grades prepare students to the employers’ specifications by giving them a curriculum disconnected from their experiences. Each school task, each grade level is to be endured for the sake of some future extrinsic reward, just as they will later endure employment only for a paycheck.[23] In school they function as ciphers with no past or future, just as they will do in the factory.

Addams deepens the indictment as she asks, “Is it possible that the business men, whom we have so long courted and worshipped in America, have really been dictating the curriculum of our public schools, in spite of the conventions of educators and the suggestions of university professors?” Knowing how businesses want to hire a number of office clerks and a larger number of factory workers, Addams puts words in the businessmen’s mouths: “Teach the children to write legibly, and to figure accurately and quickly; to acquire habits of punctuality and order; to be prompt to obey, and not question why; and you will fit them to make their way in the world as I have made mine.”[24] Brushing aside educators’ lofty rhetoric, Addams charges them with permitting the schools to be commercialized, to serve the interests of a class that cares only for its own profit and well-being. She acknowledges that the schools should not be held responsible for reforming the industrial system. Nonetheless, she charges, “We may certainly ask that our schools shall not feed and perpetuate the baser features and motives of that system.”[25] Regardless of the educators’ intentions, the schools function like a machinist’s press, stamping out mechanized workers, cut to factory specifications.

Addams recommends some curricular changes to address the problem. To begin, children should learn through manipulating concrete objects rather than just using pencils and paper. They need to work their muscles with “tangible and resistance-offering material” and experience the intrinsic interest, the “charm of manipulating actual materials.” Other speakers made similar observations.[26] G. Stanley Hall’s Child Study movement was well represented at the convention as educators discussed age-appropriate modes of learning. Child Study began in 1880 as a scientific investigation of all aspects of child development and quickly grew into a popular movement.[27] There were also intense debates about how to meet industry’s expanding need for workers who could manipulate concrete materials with specific skills. In Chicago, Marshall Field, George Pullman, and other business luminaries opened the Chicago Manual Training School in 1884, independent of the public school system. Unions resisted, seeing business-run manual training programs as a ploy to undercut their influence. Vocational programs, they argued, belonged in the public schools.[28]

Addams had no objection to age-appropriate curricular materials or to manual skill training; Hull House was developing an extensive offering of manual training classes.[29] Addams brusquely states, though, that this is not her point. “I am quite sure that no one can possibly mistake this paper as a plea for trade schools, or as a desire to fit the boy for any given industry.”[30] In recommending that children manipulate concrete objects, Addams has the children’s heritage from their parents’ premodern village in mind. For these immigrant children, manipulating objects in the classroom could serve as a bridge between their parents’ way of life and new symbolic skills of literacy and numeracy.[31]

To this Addams adds a broader curricular suggestion, one that would directly connect the southern Italian immigrant parents’ way of life with their children’s future lives in factories. The history of industry could serve as the historical axis in guiding educational reforms. Addams observes, “Industrial history in itself is an interesting thing, and the story of the long struggle of man in his attempts to bring natural forces under human control could be made most dramatic and graphic.”[32] Children who might later feed factory furnaces, for example, would find it meaningful to learn where coal comes from, how coal produces energy, and how it is a substitute for the human labor power their ancestors expended. This would demonstrate historic continuity between the work of their ancestors and parents and the work the children will perform in textile factories, steel mills, and slaughterhouses. Such a curriculum would give historic significance and dignity to a life of labor.[33] Addams hopes it would also mitigate the contempt schools implicitly convey toward those who labor with their hands. All children, she states, should learn “to use equally and to honor equally both their heads and hands.” If all students learn this, then “the hateful feeling of class distinction” might not be internalized by future workers or by those who employ them.[34]

Addams’s vision is broad. Yet within the parameters of the situation, her recommendations feel cramped, almost trivial, given that after a few years of schooling these children will enter jobs of mindless drudgery. Ideally, the primary grades should give to foreign-born children experiences parallel to what they would have received in southern Italian villages, but adjusted to their new surroundings. Yet true adjustment is impossible because of industrial society’s state of disequilibrium. Yes, it is better to enter the factory having experienced some tasks that elicit creativity and self-expression. It is better to have some experience using one’s hands to shape natural materials, better to become “flexible and alive” to the materials workers use in factories.[35] Addams knew these measures would not solve the problem. Scholars who criticize Addams for merely making factory work more palatable to the workers mistake a snapshot for her broad vision.[36] Addams notes how industrial processes are changing rapidly. She hints that workers with flexibility and alertness could become active contributors to industrial advance rather than suffering in passive obedience, an idea she would develop in the decade ahead.[37] Meanwhile, the best Addams’s proposals could do is give these children a measure of protection against the indignities they will face, some strength not to succumb, and perhaps a few tools with which to resist.

Much of Addams’s address rings true to the immigrant experience at that time. Addams had direct and deep acquaintance with immigrants from southern Italy. She knew the difficulties they faced in school and in employment. One wonders, though, why she does not allude to the reasons southern Italians emigrated. Her description of the rural Italian village sounds benign, almost idyllic. In an 1889 article, scholar and diplomat Eugene Schuyler states that southern Italians’ reasons for leaving could be captured in one word: “misery.” Their land was exhausted, their landlords exploited them, and their impoverishment was extreme. Historians today tell the same story. Thomas A. Guglielmo describes southern Italy as “deeply destitute and disorganized due to centuries of political subjugation and economic and social mismanagement.”[38] Surely Addams knew this.

Addams’s rhetorical choices throughout “Foreign-Born Children in the Primary Grades” become more intelligible when the address is read as a prelude to her plans for the Hull House Labor Museum. In just a few years the Labor Museum would open as a prototype of the curricular changes Addams proposes in this address. Her plan for the museum, like Patrick Geddes’s Outlook Tower in Edinburgh, brings the historical axis of human existence from the deep past right up into the geographical present.

“First Outline of a Labor Museum at Hull-House, Chicago”

Mention Addams’s perspectives on education, and Dewey’s name is apt to come up immediately. There are good reasons for this. One can hear Dewey in the chorus singing in counterpoint with Addams’s solo. Addams and Dewey shared many of the same views on education.[39] They opposed the dominant mode of education in which students were to accumulate the knowledge teachers imparted to them.[40] They agreed that pedagogy should build on students’ own experiences in ways that would make evident the dense interconnections between students, school, and the broader social life.

Dewey and Addams acknowledged the kinship between their educational experiments at Dewey’s Laboratory School and the Hull House Labor Museum. In “The School as Social Centre,” his 1902 address to the National Educational Association, Dewey singles out Hull House as the model for how schools should function in an industrial democracy.[41] In The School and Society Dewey describes his vision for education in terms that evoke the Hull House Labor Museum, writing, “In the ideal school there would be something of this sort: first, a complete industrial museum, giving samples of materials in various stages of manufacture, and the implements, from the simplest to the most complex, used in dealing with them.” In adding that it should also include photographs, work samples, literature, and music, he in effect recounts the Labor Museum’s manifold exhibits and activities.[42] Addams describes the Labor Museum as a living version of Dewey’s ideal school.[43]

Addams’s and Dewey’s educational experiments were collaborative efforts to which many people contributed. Teachers at the Laboratory School developed and experimented with the curriculum; Hull House residents were deeply engaged in planning and running the Labor Museum.[44] A number of individuals were involved in both projects. Mary Hill, for example, was a resident of Hull House and taught science, history, and textiles at the Laboratory School. She collected many of the artifacts displayed in the museum and even asked her fiancé, fellow Hull House resident Gerald Swope, to bring sample stones from Mexico that women used to cook tortillas.[45]

Fruitful though it is to compare Addams’s and Dewey’s early writings on education, Patrick Geddes’s Outlook Tower is a better match for Addams’s thinking on education than Dewey’s Laboratory School. This may sound surprising to scholars who base their remarks about the Labor Museum on the account Addams gives in Twenty Years at Hull-House, published ten years after the museum opened.[46] In a chapter titled “Immigrants and Their Children,” Addams highlights how she talked frequently with Dewey about her plans. She shapes her discussion to fit the chapter’s theme by presenting the museum as a place for reconciling immigrant parents with their rapidly Americanizing children.[47] While mending rifts between parents and children was among Addams’s motivations for the Labor Museum, it was not the primary one, and it does not explain the design of the museum. The resemblance between Geddes’s conception of the Outlook Tower and Addams’s plan for the Labor Museum is so striking as to merit giving Geddes an extended solo before Addams’s voice enters.

In her address “A Function of the Social Settlement,” given in November 1898, nearly three years after the Laboratory School opened, Addams states her chief regret that no institution had devised a form of education for Chicago’s immigrant, working-class population, whom she describes as being in “the tribal stage of knowledge.”[48] One hears echoes of Wundt’s description of primitive cultures in this remark. Addams points to Patrick Geddes’s Outlook Tower, located next to Edinburgh Castle in Scotland, as a possible model that could be adapted for Chicago. The Outlook Tower is an attempt, Addams states, “not only to graphically visualize a synthesis, an encyclopedia of orderly knowledge” but also, in Geddes’s words, “‘to outline a correspondingly detailed synergy of orderly actions.’”[49] The following spring Geddes gave a talk at Hull House on the Outlook Tower and his plans for revitalizing Edinburgh.[50] Right after the visit Addams commented to New York settlement resident Lillian Wald, “We all found Mr. Geddes’ work inspiring and miss him very much.”[51] Addams doesn’t say, but she likely discussed her plans for the Labor Museum with Geddes. Geddes and Addams kept up the friendship, meeting at the World’s Fair in Paris in 1900.[52] They tried but just missed connecting in India in 1923 when Geddes was teaching at the University of Bombay.[53]

Born in Scotland, Geddes began his career by studying evolutionary biology with Thomas Huxley in London. While doing research in marine biology in France, he added studies of sociology and geography.[54] His social theorizing was firmly rooted in biology. Like Addams, he believed that organisms—including humans—both shape and are shaped by the habitats in which they dwell and that human interventions can help guide the course that social evolution will take.[55] He regarded history as a kind of social geology, with each era adding to the region’s strata, like layers of a coral reef.[56] Geddes’s career as an urban planner owed much to the geographical lens through which he approached his work. He conducted regional surveys of cities, attending to their specific geological and sociological characteristics. Geddes thought of a geographical region as both “a place in space” and “a drama in time.” He sought not only an “aggregate” of every sort of data but also an “integrate” of data from every discipline so as to understand the relations among all aspects and functions of the region.[57] Geddes compared his regional surveys to Darwin’s meticulous observations in the gardens where he carried out many scientific experiments.[58]

In the mid-1880s Geddes began his urban experiments in Edinburgh. The buildings in Old Town (including the now famous Royal Mile between Edinburgh Castle and Holyrood Palace) were badly deteriorated. He bought a few tenement buildings and encouraged some university students to join him and his family in living there. They collected data on every aspect of the region’s history, geography, and inhabitants. Using this data they began to renovate tenements and create garden spaces. They engaged the local residents in their projects, gradually withdrawing their own involvement so that the local residents would be key agents in changing their own habitat.[59] Parallels to Addams’s work at Hull House are striking.

The Outlook Tower, Geddes claims, is “not only a Geographic Exhibition, but a Geotechnic Laboratory.”[60] Functioning as both museum and research center, the Outlook Tower was part of an experiment in higher education. Geddes designed a university-level summer school curriculum for regional studies in which students were active investigators. The program emphasized collaborative, experimental work in the laboratory, and it engaged students in “geotechnics,” projects designed to reconstruct the area to make it more conducive for humane habitation. University of Chicago sociologist and one-time Hull House resident Charles Zueblin visited the school and said it had “the most interesting synthesis of studies to be found anywhere.”[61] Geddes’s motto, engraved over the door of the Outlook Tower, was one Addams would endorse: Vivendo discimus, “By living, we learn.”[62]

Perhaps the tower’s most noted feature was the rooftop Camera Obscura. It enabled viewers to see a panoramic image of the city in all its wholeness, its beauty as well as its geographical, historical, and sociological complexity. (The Camera Obscura is still open today as a tourist attraction.)[63] As one descended the tower’s five floors, the scope of the presentations widened. After experiencing a floor on the city of Edinburgh, a visitor would tour a floor on Scotland, and then one on the British Empire, with “an alcove for the United States.” The next floor, depicting Europe, gave special prominence to the island of Cyprus because of its position connecting Asia, Europe, and Africa. Finally, the ground floor contained exhibits on the entire globe. The exhibits gave information on history, geography, science, commerce, and the arts. Artifacts and photographs were supplemented by maps and graphs that demonstrated relations among the past, present, and a projected future. Each floor conveyed detailed plans of ongoing projects for further development.[64] Zueblin described the Outlook Tower as “at once school, museum, atelier, and observatory.”[65]

What attracted Addams to the Outlook Tower was how Geddes had made relations among all dimensions of human experience the focus of his synthesis. In this respect the Labor Museum was Hull House’s equivalent to Geddes’s Outlook Tower. In the tower, Edinburgh was the point where the axis of history intersected with the axis of the global present. It enabled visitors to understand their place in history as well as their place in their contemporary world. The Labor Museum was designed to place Chicago’s immigrant working people at the intersection of the historical axis and their present geographical one.[66] Throughout her writings on education Addams repeatedly insists that what factory-employed workers and their children need is “a consciousness of the social value of [their] work” that would enable them to see themselves “in connection and cooperation with the whole.”[67] The Outlook Tower and the Labor Museum were designed to foster an awareness of people’s place in the social organism and a historically informed appreciation of their social value. Addams’s biographer and nephew, James Weber Linn, writes that of the many activities of Hull House, the Labor Museum was “the one that gave Jane Addams the most delight.”[68]

It is significant that the Labor Museum was designed as a museum and not a school. Addams notes that a museum is more suited than a school for adults who could not promise to attend regularly because of workplace and family responsibilities.[69] She could have added that museums at the time were considered more important for the production of knowledge than universities. The Labor Museum could be categorized as an anthropological or ethnological museum, although Addams might insist it was too vital and human a place for such classification.[70] Anthropologist William C. Sturtevant writes that prior to 1920 the bulk of anthropological research was carried out by museums and identifies 1900, the year the Hull House Labor Museum opened, as the high point of museums’ importance for anthropology.[71] Museums in the United States had vast collections of objects, resources that universities generally lacked.[72] Historian Steven Conn writes that after the Civil War museums took their previously jumbled assortments of objects and organized them according to “the metanarrative of evolutionary progress.”[73]

Objects displayed in the Labor Museum could be described as organized according to this narrative pattern, with physical labor occupying the central role in the story. It was, as curator Jessie Luther emphasized, “a labor museum in contradistinction to a commercial museum.”[74] Most histories, Addams notes, tell stories of kings and wars, about “that which destroys life and property.” By contrast, the Labor Museum would present stories of the history of labor, that is, stories of those processes that “create and conserve civilization.”[75] The museum would tell stories of how people like Hull House’s immigrant, working-class neighbors had for countless generations wrestled with natural materials in order to sustain their bodies and create their cultures.[76]

These immigrant workers and their children, Addams claims, are still at “the tribal stage of knowledge.”[77] Her reasons for thinking that the Labor Museum’s exhibits would appeal to them match what she wrote in previous essays about people at the primitive stage of development. The museum would be full of activity, attractive like a show at a fair, its presentations dramatic and graphic. Visitors and participants would not be asked to manipulate abstractions far removed from their experience, as educational programs too often asked students to do. Instead, they would handle concrete materials that already figured in their daily lives. The aim was to give the workers “historic interpretation” and “imaginative uplift.”[78]

The history of labor was told through the Labor Museum’s five departments of metals, wood, grain, textiles, and bookbinding.[79] Hull House cofounder Ellen Gates Starr ran the bookbinding department after spending time in England learning the craft. The other departments were largely staffed by immigrants who demonstrated craft skills they had learned before emigrating.[80] The departments’ organization resembled that of Geddes’s Outlook Tower, tracing the history of labor from the deep past to contemporary Chicago. The metallurgy department, for example, began with two strands of narrative. The first followed the history of metalwork among American Indians in the Great Lakes region. The second began with metalwork among ancient Phoenicians and Etruscans and moved on to medieval European guilds. The two strands joined as Europeans migrated to the Great Lakes region. The exhibits included stories of nineteenth-century exploitation of children in English coal mines and subsequent labor legislation and union formation. Maps gave the locations of mines and transportation routes to the cities. Hull House workshops provided live demonstrations of smelting, rolling, and shaping ore into usable forms of metal. One could trace the history of labor with copper from the deep past to its current use in the local Western Electric factory.[81] Immigrants who worked with metals in local factories would see that their daily work had a long and complex history. They could understand their contributions in both historical and contemporary terms. This, Addams hoped, would give them “a consciousness of the social value of [their] work.”[82]

In Geddes’s Outlook Tower the historical and geographical axes intersected in Edinburgh. In the Labor Museum these two axes not only intersected in Chicago; they also ran alongside each other and coincided to a significant extent. In Addams’s eyes, the social geology of Chicago was just as present as the geological layers on a cliff face. This was particularly clear in the textile department, the one most extensively developed when the museum opened in November 1900.[83] Demonstrations of spinning techniques were arranged in historical order, with immigrants from Italy, Syria, Russia, and Ireland demonstrating how to use various distaffs and spinning wheels. They had acquired these tools and learned how to use them in their countries of origin. To these immigrants, their tools and skills were not only historical but contemporary and vital.[84]

As noted above, the arrangement of objects in late nineteenth-century museums reinforced “the metanarrative of evolutionary progress.” Anglo-Saxons were typically portrayed as ascending to the peak of civilization, while other cultural groups were represented as more primitive and inferior.[85] If the Labor Museum had offered only its organized displays of artifacts, it would be open to the charge of reinforcing Anglo-Saxon cultural hegemony. No doubt many of its visitors had also attended Chicago’s 1893 World’s Columbian Exposition. Going through the Fair’s Department of Ethnology and Archeology and strolling down the mile-long midway, they may have felt like they were experiencing a human zoo. Franz Boas brought fourteen members of the Kwakiutl Indians from British Columbia to perform rituals and ceremonial dances in a reassembled Indian village. The department head, Frederick Ward Putnam, wanted fairgoers to have an opportunity to see, before the Indians’ cultures “vanished into history,” how they presumably had lived before the time of Columbus.[86] On the midway fairgoers could catch sights and sounds of many seemingly exotic cultures from around the world, including a re-created Cairo street with donkey boys, belly dancers, and camel drivers.[87] Visitors familiar with these patterns may have had their prejudices reinforced at the Hull House Labor Museum.

While the arrangement of displays in museums and exhibitions at the time strengthened the dominant narrative of Anglo-Saxon ascent, Conn cautions against interpreting these institutions solely in terms of the imposition of cultural power. He proposes that instead they be understood as sites for intellectual and cultural debate.[88] The Labor Museum can be understood as a place where these debates took place, as some of its features functioned to subvert the message of the dominant narrative. Unlike the exposition’s midway, the Labor Museum was simultaneously “a museum, a classroom and a shop.”[89] The immigrants who demonstrated their craft skills were not set apart from visitors by ropes or guardrails. They functioned as guides and docents, demonstrating their skills, teaching classes, and selling their goods. This placed them in positions of expertise rather than inferiority.[90] Journalist Marion Foster Washburne, watching an elderly German potter at work, observes, “One almost sees him think through his skillful thumbs and forefingers.” As the Irish woman curating the textile department told Washburne about her own immigration story, she occasionally turned aside to converse in Gaelic with Mrs. Sweeney, another museum employee. It wasn’t the objects that most impressed Washburne. She comments, “We feel that this living woman—this worker and victim and survivor—is the most precious thing that the Museum has shown us.”[91] Because middle-class visitors to the Labor Museum could interact directly with these immigrants, they had an opportunity to revise cultural stereotypes by learning from them.

That these stereotypes need revision, Addams observes, is a sign of moral and perceptual deficiency in members of the middle and upper classes. That they permit oppressive industrial conditions to persist signals their contempt for those who work with their hands. Here she adds a historical dimension to similar remarks about contempt in “Foreign-Born Children in the Primary Grades.” Addams writes, “Apparently our democratic sentiment has not yet recovered industrial occupations from the deep distrust which slavery and the feudal organization of society have cast upon them.”[92] Genuine social reform of industry requires that these perceptual sensibilities be changed, as well as the actual processes of production. Addams hopes the Labor Museum will prompt middle-class visitors to begin revising their assumptions about those who labor with their hands to produce the goods that they themselves use.

The democratic character of the Labor Museum was built into the structure that housed it. In the opening essay of The Architecture of Science, historian Peter Galison asks, “What can architecture tell us about the changing identity of the scientist? And conversely how can science inform us about the shifting identity of the architect?”[93] For the Labor Museum, the answers to these questions thread through the museum’s architect, Allen B. Pond, who, with his brother, Irving K. Pond, designed and constructed five of Chicago’s settlements.[94] Allen Pond was with the Hull House project from its very beginning. When he heard Addams propose the idea of a settlement, he offered to give her a tour of the city. As Addams recounted decades later at his memorial service, Pond was as delighted as she was to discover the Hull Mansion. Once an elegant country home, it had become, in Pond’s words, “dingy, forlorn, and prematurely old,” tucked between a saloon and an undertaker’s parlor. He set out right away to renovate the portion of the house Addams was able to rent, and for the next forty years, as architect and board member, stayed close to the settlement’s mission of enacting democratic relations within the neighborhood.[95] In the Pond brothers’ hands, the settlement’s brick structures were as fluidly responsive to the neighborhood’s changing needs as was the settlement’s constantly changing programming.

Allen Pond laid out his understanding of his role in a series of articles published in the Brickbuilder, later renamed Architectural Forum. He defined his initial task as creating structures that reflected the abilities and needs of the neighborhood, as well as those of the settlement’s residents. The settlement’s material form, he writes, should express “hospitability and homelikeness,” and be capable of expanding to keep pace as the settlement experimented with new ways of meeting the neighborhood’s needs.[96] The Pond brothers carried this vision with them as they built and remodeled the Hull House settlement into a complex of thirteen buildings covering an entire city block.[97] Pond acknowledged that the Hull House settlement was an “aggregation of partially related units” and lacked the logical, organic wholeness of a structure whose mission and scope were clear from the beginning. Yet, he insisted, the complex had “a certain homogeneity” and “individuality,” reflective of the settlement’s mission and mode of growth.[98]

The thousands of neighbors who came to the Hull House complex each week would not have experienced the Labor Museum as a separate temple of knowledge but as yet another of Hull House’s seemingly endless experiments. The Hull House buildings all served multiple purposes, and the mix changed frequently. In 1893 the Pond brothers erected a building to house a coffeehouse and a gymnasium. When the size of the coffeehouse could no longer match the neighbors’ and residents’ enthusiasm for socializing and good meals, the Pond brothers built a new space for it with a new auditorium directly above, right next to the Children’s House with its kindergarten and day nursery. In 1900 the Labor Museum’s textile department opened in a temporary space on the second floor of the Butler Building, which also housed an art gallery, studio space, and rooms for Hull House male residents. The Pond brothers moved and remodeled the old coffeehouse building with a larger space for the Labor Museum, the cooking school, and workshops on the first floor. The second floor housed more workshops alongside the changing area and showers. The Ponds elevated the gymnasium by adding a floor. Museum visitors shared the entrance with bloomer-uniformed members of the women’s basketball team, reportedly “considered invincible.”[99]

The Labor Museum gives a democratic response to Galison’s questions of how architecture affects the identity of scientists and architects. The immigrant neighbors who contributed artifacts, worked the exhibits, and taught in the workshops count as members of the scientific community at Hull House.[100] The architects shared fully in the process of enacting democracy by contributing their skills with space, light, and building materials. The design of the Labor Museum in its material and human manifestations enacted the aim of the settlement, as expressed by Hull House resident Dorothea Moore. She writes, “The exchange is the vital thing. . . . This is the reason of the settlement; the rest is pure façade.” For Moore, as for Addams, the aim of the Labor Museum was to provide a setting in which all participants could enact human kinship by giving them a concrete “consciousness of their social value” and enabling them to see themselves “in connection and cooperation with the whole.”[101]

This is an organic, expansive conception of democracy, with implications spreading far beyond the museum’s premises. How work was carried out in the museum was a pattern that, if extended, could reconstruct capitalist production. The conceptual and practical link from the Labor Museum to capitalist production was through the Arts and Crafts movement. Members of Chicago’s Arts and Crafts Society were deeply involved in the Labor Museum, adding another collaborative layer to those already mentioned. The society was founded at Hull House in 1897, with Ellen Gates Starr as a cofounder and Hull House resident George Twose as its first president. The Pond brothers were charter members.[102] The society was able to enlist help from the many art and artisan classes and studios already operating at Hull House. These were largely staffed by neighborhood immigrants who had acquired artistic skills in metalwork, pottery, and textile design in their countries of origin.[103]

Inspired by John Ruskin and William Morris, the Arts and Crafts movement originated in England and spread across the United States during the late nineteenth century.[104] John Ruskin, art critic turned moral reformer, and William Morris, decorator, poet, and socialist, protested the division of labor that structured industrial factories.[105] Morris observes that the history of labor in large measure overlaps with the history of art. Prior to industrialization “artisan” and “artist” were equivalent terms, with “art” understood as performing a skill or craft to create objects for use in everyday life. Artisans’ products were expressions of their whole personalities. Intellect, memory, and imagination merged as their hands shaped nature’s materials into usable form.[106] With industrialization, the association between art and craft was severed. “Fine” arts became dissociated from and elevated above “useful” arts and the craft skills needed to produce them. Likewise in manufacturing, those who designed products became dissociated from and elevated above those who actually produced them.[107] It is not labor that is divided, Ruskin observes, so much as “men . . . [who are] broken into small fragments and crumbs of life.”[108] His well-known dictum expresses this sentiment: “Life without industry is guilt, and industry without art is brutality.”[109] To Ruskin and Morris, keeping handcraft traditions alive is not a matter of nostalgia. Preserving them would keep alive the preindustrial relation between artisan, tools, and natural materials, in which intelligence and creativity conjoin with bodily skills.[110]

Figure 5. Hull House, Pond & Pond, Architects, 1900. This is a sketch the Hull House architects drew of their proposed renovation of the Gymnasium Building. The large building at the corner is the Children’s Building. Directly attached to it on the right (along Polk Street) is the Coffee House and Auditorium. Just past the arch on the far right is the proposed renovation with the Labor Museum on the first floor, workshops and shower facilities on the second, and the Gymnasium on the third. The Hull Mansion is to the immediate left of the Children’s Building (on Halsted Street), set back from the street and out of view. The next visible building is the Butler Art Building, which also housed male residents. Chicago Architectural Sketch Club, Book of the Exhibition of 1900, p. 67. Courtesy of Ryerson and Burnham Libraries, Art Institute of Chicago.

Industry’s brutalizing effects that so concerned Ruskin and Morris were in full view in the Hull House neighborhood. In “A Function of the Social Settlement” Addams gives the example of neighbors working in a soap factory who are pressured to wrap bars of soap at excessive speeds. To work for long hours without the “natural solace of labor which art gives,” she writes, robs them of the opportunity to use their labor as an artistic medium for communicating their thoughts and feelings to others.[111] The evening art and craft classes Hull House offered to these workers made the absurdity of the situation even more apparent. Addams observes, “It is not only bad pedagogics, but it is an impossible undertaking, to appeal to a sense of beauty and order which has been crushed by years of ugly and disorderly work.”[112] The absurdity extends into the fine arts themselves. When art is separated from labor, the arts become degraded as they move further away from the democratizing trend of the time. On a visit to the Chicago Art Institute, Addams reports, her neighbors saw only “hideousness” in some finely sculpted oxen skulls. Their guide’s explanation of how religious rituals of animal sacrifice served to bind together ancient Greek society, did not give them “an armor of erudition” sufficient to overcome their initial reaction. Why, Addams asks, when the labor movement is the era’s primary channel for expressing solidarity, had artists looked only to the past for inspiration?[113] Both the fine arts and the useful arts should be in the service of education by revealing to workers their place and value within the social fabric.

For people in the Arts and Crafts movement, the culture’s dependence on industry’s division of labor posed a challenge. Ruskin, along with Morris in his early years, opposed industrial production. Economist Thorstein Veblen, who contributed a talk to the Labor Museum’s lecture series on industrial history, elaborated on the difficulty this opposition posed.[114] The Arts and Crafts movement, he claims, is largely a sentimental aestheticism. Only the wealthy can afford items produced by craft artists. In a machine-age democratic culture, the masses demand products, and the only way to produce enough of them is to insert workers within standardized industrial processes.[115]

In later years Morris came to appreciate how machinery could relieve drudgery and advocated that machines in factories come to function as artisans’ tools.[116] Addams and the Chicago Arts and Crafts Society agreed. In “A Function of the Social Settlement” Addams inserts language from the society’s constitution that insists “the machine be no longer allowed to dominate the workman and reduce his production into a mechanical distortion.”[117] Veblen thought this statement was no more than “a perfunctory concession to facts.”[118] Architect Frank Lloyd Wright, though, in a talk at Hull House, spoke of the machine’s democratic potential. He praises the machine’s democratic functions, as it frees people from lives of sheer physical drudgery. It replaces the elaborate fussiness of Victorian aesthetics with democratic simplicity, revealing the clean beauty of wood, metal, and concrete. Industrial production forms a vast organic, living process, Wright claims, with gigantic Corliss engines as the nerve ganglia that make possible the modern city.[119]

This is the context for understanding Addams’s discussion of industrial machinery in her writings on education. She does not comment on how to design machines and educate workers so they could use the machines as tools of their own artistry. Instead, in “First Outline of a Labor Museum” Addams offers a way of perceiving and conceptualizing machines. Her few sentences may obscure their implication: if adopted, it would subvert liberalism’s conception of private property that serves as the foundation of the capitalist system. Addams inserts several phrases without attribution from Frederic Harrison’s essay “The Sacredness of Ancient Buildings” to make an analogy between his conception of architecture and hers of industrial machinery.[120] Harrison’s essay was part of a discussion in England about preserving architectural treasures that had fallen into disrepair. Morris was one of the organizers of a society dedicated to this work, the Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings.[121] Harrison notes that works of architecture, unlike painting, music, and much of literature, are created by many hands. They occupy public spaces and over generations become part of people’s daily lives. This gives them a sacred quality, for they contain, in John Milton’s words, the “seasoned life of man preserved and stored up” in them. Milton had used the phrase to talk about books, Harrison used it for buildings, and Addams uses the same words to describe industrial machinery.[122] A machine’s lineage makes it a “social possession,” she claims. Many hands contributed to its invention; many hands contribute to its use. It is wrong to regard a machine as private property that gives the owner control over its use and sole ownership over the profits it generates.[123] To Addams, the problems of industrial exploitation include how objects are perceived and legally categorized. In solving these problems, the range of objects that could be privately owned would diminish, and the concept of private property itself would shrink. Through this process, Addams projected, the industrial system could move toward her organic, expansive conception of democracy.

*

Addams’s proposals and experiments in curricular reform reveal her creativity and synthetic imagination. Addams adopts professional educators’ standard tropes and reshapes them into a cutting critique of their pedagogical recommendations. She works with the standard arrangement of museum artifacts to subvert the standard message. She takes Milton’s seventeenth-century words about books and uses them to imagine what the institution of private property could become if made fully democratic. Fueling it all is Addams’s conviction that those at the bottom of society are worthy and that it is the responsibility of those more privileged to find ways to recognize them as fully contributing members of the polity.

Addams concludes the “First Report of the Labor Museum” with these words: “Two sound educational principles we may perhaps claim for the labor museum even in this early state of experiment—first, that it concentrates and dramatizes the inherited resources of a man’s occupation, and secondly, that it conceives of education as a ‘continuing reconstruction of experience.’”[124] To Addams, education is a process of drawing from the resources inherited from a deeper past than one has experienced and reconstructing that inheritance to good account for the future.

With these words Addams encapsulates how her philosophy of education is both thoroughly evolutionary and expansively democratic in scope. In evolutionary processes, the present holds the past in itself and carries it into the future. The past is not replicated in an exact or static manner; organisms and habitats experience evolutionary change through variation, mutation, and adjustment. Two factors about the past, however, are elemental and must be carried into present and future. For humans, these facts are, first, that we are of the earth. We are biological creatures who are sustained by physical exertion with earthy materials. Second, we are gregarious animals whose social and sympathetic instincts enable us to survive as a species. Addams’s proposals for curricular reform and the organization of the Labor Museum were designed according to these evolutionary truths. The history of industry, told as the story of labor from the beginning of human time, incorporates these elemental facts. Addams’s proposals focus directly on how laboring with the earth’s materials has sustained human life and how forms of labor have changed over time. Additionally, her proposals demonstrate how labor and its products, as socially generated and transmitted, create civilizations.

Addams’s philosophy of education is also expansively democratic in its connections to the social transformations she envisioned and worked to bring about. Addams understood how education could support and feed social reconstruction on a larger scale. Dewey’s philosophy of education, which he calls “a continuous reconstruction of experience,” also respects the past, acknowledges the importance of manual labor, and values social connections.[125] More thoroughly than Dewey, however, Addams synthesizes these realizations into her educational philosophy. In a line Addams sometimes quoted from George Eliot’s The Mill on the Floss, Maggie Tulliver cries to Stephen, “If the past can’t guide us, what can guide us?”[126] As Addams selects which trends to encourage among emerging trends of the times, her presentation of feudalism as a complete and functioning social organism guides her in setting education within the path toward association and social democracy.

Addams does not call, however, for a return to feudal modes of production. She rejects the elements of feudalism that are hierarchical and asymmetric. She retains the sense of mutual obligations that sustain social ties, thus generating patterns of association that are cooperative, collective, and democratic. In bringing Ruskin’s and Morris’s image of feudal production as exemplifying the unity of craft and art to the foreground, Addams retains the image of labor as a synthesis of mind, body, and skill. Washburne’s observation of the German potter thinking through his thumbs and fingers illustrates this synthesis.

Addams appreciates how industrial machinery can alleviate the brutalizing effects of sheer physical labor. The problem with industrial machines arises when they function as feudal overlords rather than as tools in workers’ hands. Addams’s analysis of machines as the “seasoned life of man preserved and stored up” creates an avenue toward thorough economic reconstruction. It specifically carries a strong critique of capitalist private property as ownership in the means of production. As shown in chapter 3, Addams did not regard capitalism as the enactment of ahistorical economic truths. With Webb and Kirkup, Addams regarded capitalism as a feudal arrangement in which feudal control was relocated to the factory floor. Capitalist private property, then, is also a feudal institution in which profit is a manifestation of feudal, monarchical privilege. To Addams, the economic and legal status of private property should be reconfigured to reflect the associative character of productive processes. Machines are products of a social past and implements of a social future; terms of their legal ownership should be adjusted to reflect this truth.

Addams’s philosophy of education issues from her telling of history “from the bottom up.” Her message resounds in today’s calls for social history, labor history, women’s history, and the histories of subjugated peoples. Historians who insist that the history of slavery is the history of America are right. Historians who insist that the story of the American West cannot be told except as a story of peoples of Mexican and Asian descent are also right. The struggle of Native Americans against near erasure, and of subjugated peoples to create and sustain culture, is also the American story. Many historians who write these histories do so primarily for those who see little of themselves in school textbooks. Addams told the history of civilization as the history of labor expressly for those who labored with their bodies and rarely saw themselves in books of any kind. By bringing this story of labor’s past and setting it as an evolutionary ideal for the future, Addams replaces past and current contempt for labor and for the people who perform it with the honor it and they deserve.

To her “sound educational principles” quoted above, of education as a process of evolutionary reconstruction from past to future, Addams appends the words, “More than that the best ‘education’ cannot do for any of us.”[127] In addition to clearly conveying Addams’s conception of education, these sentences also suggest education’s limits. She envisions education as one contributor, but only one, toward making the vast social changes required before the era of association can be realized. Education should not be expected to ameliorate all the problems of industrial exploitation. These have legal, political, and economic dimensions, and people from all walks of life must share responsibility for addressing them.

Some scholars have taken the design of the Labor Museum as a sign of Addams’s alliance with capitalist employers. Jackson Lears interprets the message of the Labor Museum as “therapeutic,” representing a turn from “social justice to individual fulfillment.” He writes that Addams’s efforts and those of other humanitarian reformers made workers more compliant with the capitalist system and less apt to protest their working conditions.[128] Lears’s response substitutes one of Addams’s steps toward social justice reform for the whole of her message. In “Foreign-Born Children in the Primary Grades,” Addams calls industrialized labor an “incubus” that “presses so heavily upon so large a number of our fellow citizens.”[129] For children and workers to gain an informed consciousness of their social value is, to Addams, one step toward removing this incubus. That this initial step in a much larger vision failed to reform capitalist production, whose processes were far beyond Addams’s control, does not place Addams in alliance with the capitalists.

Addams was both a theorist and a social reform activist. In reading Addams it is important to sort out when she is speaking as a theorist laying out her vision for social reconstruction, and when she is speaking as an activist making concrete proposals for what to do next. Activists cannot simply deduce the next steps from their larger vision. They must take into account the social realities in which they live and the people with whom they must work. Addams’s suggestions for curricular change to the National Educational Association and her plans for the Labor Museum are proposals from Addams in her role as activist. They are informed but not dictated by her larger vision of a cooperative democracy in which the creative capacities of all can flourish.

Addams could envision in a general way what such a society might look like, but she could not draw a blueprint. Like other evolutionary theorists of the time, Addams used terms such as social democracy, the era of association, and universal fellowship to identify the direction toward which social evolutionary processes seemed to be moving. As in biological evolution, a social habitat’s eventual configuration will be shaped by countless intermediary, small adjustments, many of them outside human knowledge and control. Addams’s concrete proposals for reform should be understood as efforts toward making such adjustments. It would be sheer hubris to think humans could do more than this to determine the future. To Addams, the way toward social reconstruction was as intricate as evolution itself.

Chapter 6

Science and the Social Settlement

“A Function of the Social Settlement” is a peculiar essay. It seems to have a vital message, yet a unifying theme is elusive, and its parts appear to be loosely related at best. The essay received plenty of attention. Addams presented it as a keynote address at the November 1898 conference of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. Publicity for the conference billed her as “the foremost representative of settlement work in the country.”[1] It was published in 1899 in the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, reissued as a pamphlet by the London School of Economics, and excerpted in the Review of Reviews.[2] The Convention of Ethical Societies held a year later adopted the essay’s title as the convention’s theme. In the conference’s opening address, John Lovejoy Elliott, of New York City’s Society for Ethical Culture and founder of the Hudson Guild, singled out Addams’s essay as “the best statement that has yet been made of the objects for which Settlements have been founded.”[3]

“A Function of the Social Settlement” demonstrates how two elements of Addams’s thinking had matured by century’s end. First, Addams centers the settlement and its work firmly within the conception of science accepted by evolutionary social scientists at that time, one in which ethical responsibilities lay within the penumbra of the term “science.” Accordingly, Addams’s method of ethical deliberation is scientific as well as ethical. Although Addams does not include this essay in Democracy and Social Ethics, it articulates how Democracy and Social Ethics is a work of both scientific investigation and ethical analysis. Second, Addams’s use of insights from Dewey, James, and Tolstoy illustrates how flexibly and creatively she could adapt resources in the culture for her own purposes. She mentions each name only once, but their voices in the chorus are dominant. Addams’s rhetorical strategy, illustrated here in her use of Tolstoy’s writings, is to shine light on others’ wisdom, while subtly veiling profound disagreements. Taken together, these two elements yield a unified interpretation of “A Function of the Social Settlement” by demonstrating that through the settlement’s work, scientific verification and art’s harmonizing function become one.

The Social Settlement and the Meaning of Science

Throughout the 1890s Addams described the social settlement’s function by articulating different facets of the settlement’s relationship with the sciences. In her 1892 lecture on the necessity of settlements Addams defined motivation for settlement work in terms of the evolutionary psychology of primitive instincts and the historical evolution of democracy and religion. In 1895 Addams, with her fellow residents at Hull House, published Hull-House Maps and Papers, one of the earliest empirical, scientific surveys of an urban neighborhood. By the end of the decade Addams was ready to make a breathtakingly bold statement. In “A Function of the Social Settlement” Addams quickly clarifies that a settlement is not a democratized version of a “philanthropic” enterprise, a term that carried feudal connotations of social hierarchy. It has a “sterner and more enduring aspect,” that of the “application of knowledge.”[4] Addams uses this phrase to designate an integral phase of scientific investigation.

Contemporary scholars commenting on Addams’s statement that “the settlement stands for application as opposed to research” do not question that application is a separate activity from knowledge production, although they offer ways of linking them. Sociologist Matthias Gross describes how Hull House’s experiments in application fed back into the process of knowledge production, blurring the boundary line between the production and application of knowledge. Historians Ira Harkavy and John L. Puckett discuss the close and fruitful relationships formed between social scientists and social activists at the University of Chicago and Hull House in the 1890s and 1900s, but they do not suggest that “social reform” was an integral element of the process of scientific investigation per se. Philosopher Charlene Haddock Seigfried develops how Addams employed a pragmatist methodology that integrated research with social activism. In this she is correct, although she does not suggest that social activism was an integral dimension of an accepted understanding of scientific research at that time.[5]

Addams’s declaration that “the settlement stands for application as opposed to research” was part of a long-standing debate about the meaning of the term “applied science.” In their contributions to a symposium on the term, historians of science Robert Bud, Graeme Gooday, and Paul Lucier trace the term’s history from the nineteenth century and into the twentieth. In 1817 Samuel Coleridge was the first to use it. Reflecting German Kantian thought, Coleridge defined “pure science” as “based on a priori principles” and “applied science” as “learned empirically.” By midcentury “applied science” had absorbed connotations of “practical science” and the notion of “science applied to the arts” from the French.[6] “Applied science” resulted in practical knowledge and was thought of as independent from “pure science.” In 1880 Thomas H. Huxley proposed a radical redefinition of the terms, declaring that while pure science was of “no practical utility,” applied science “is nothing but the application of pure science to particular classes of problems.”[7] Gooday locates Huxley’s remarks within the context of university scientists’ quest to enhance their professional standing and to justify funding their work. It took years for Huxley’s version of the split between pure and applied science to gain dominance.[8]

In the late nineteenth century some scientists in the United States used the “application of science” to refer to knowledge of explicitly commercial value. Others objected. To them, “applied science” referred to investigations that merged scientific discovery and practical results in one integrated process, illustrated, for example, by Coast Guard and geological surveys.[9] Addams sided with the latter camp when she pointed to a Johns Hopkins biologist’s invention of a device to aid the oyster industry as “an excellent example of what I do not mean.”[10]

Many in Addams’s audience at the conference would have understood “application of knowledge” as Addams did, as naming an integral step in the production of scientific knowledge itself. As the social sciences emerged as independent academic disciplines, there was much discussion of how they fit in with established sciences and what they could contribute to the advancement of knowledge. Just as medical researchers had to “apply” their hypotheses to actual patients before they could declare an advance in medical knowledge, so social scientists needed to validate their findings concretely in human habitats. Sidney Webb’s expression of this idea is typical. Because every person’s existence and well-being are “inextricably interwoven” within the social organism, “the conditions of social health are accordingly a matter for scientific investigation.”[11]

This history gives the context for understanding how Addams uses quotations from Dewey and James to underscore the social settlement’s role in the production of knowledge. Some scholars suggest that Addams used them for the rhetorical purpose of conferring authority on her remarks.[12] Even if true, this response minimizes their significance. In contrast to Huxley, Addams, Dewey, and James were trying to keep science tethered to the world of practical activity. Addams uses Dewey’s definition of the application of knowledge to place the settlement firmly within the process of scientific investigation and assign to it the culminating step in the production of knowledge, that of verification.

Addams begins the paragraph containing Dewey’s and James’s quotations with the ambiguous attribution “It is frequently stated” and continues, “that the most pressing problem of modern life is that of a reconstruction and a reorganization of the knowledge which we possess; that we are at last struggling to realize in terms of life all that has been discovered and absorbed, to make it over into healthy and direct expressions of free living.” Although Addams doesn’t say so, several of the phrases in this sentence are taken directly from Dewey’s article “The Significance of the Problem of Knowledge.”[13] The sentences she then attributes to Dewey consist of rearranged quote fragments from the same article. Dewey’s point is that philosophers are no longer interested in knowledge for its own sake but, in words Addams quotes, had turned to “its application to life,” in order to “secur[e] a method of action.” Otherwise, knowledge “becomes a social nuisance and disturber.”[14] Addams reinforces Dewey’s point with James’s claim that “the ultimate test for us of what a truth means is indeed the conduct it dictates or inspires.”[15]

“The Significance of the Problem of Knowledge” can be read as Dewey’s philosophical contribution to the debate over the meaning of “applied science.” In it Dewey gives a Hegelian-tinged, evolutionary account of how the problem of knowledge evolved from the past to the present day. Knowledge became a problem when Socrates faced great social disorder in Greece. Socrates’s concerns were practical; he sought knowledge that would help him find how to live and how society could be made just. Plato abstracted the quest for knowledge out of its home in the world of action and placed it in the transcendent realm of ideas. The medieval church kept it there to cement its own power and hierarchical control. In the Renaissance and early modern era, individuals claimed the right to determine truth on their own authority and to organize or “reconstruct” society accordingly. The ensuing debate among modern philosophers between empiricism and rationalism was essentially a debate over two methods of reconstruction, the empiricists’ method of initiative and freedom versus the rationalists’ method of order and control. Dewey contends that this debate, when pursued on the theoretical level, inevitably ends in deadlock. It will be resolved when knowledge is brought back down from the transcendent realm and reinserted into the messiness of everyday activity. Only in this way could conclusions be reached. In this, the democratic age, the individual is now the “alembic” through which the goods of civilization must pass and through whom social reconstruction must take place. The significance of knowledge is in its application to life. That is, knowledge is significant when it is used as a tool, and the modern tool for doing this is science.[16]

Addams could have quoted any number of social scientists to support this broader notion that the application of knowledge is the culminating step in scientific investigation. Like Dewey, their reasoning is historical and evolutionary, and they also identify the current moment as democratic. Like Dewey, they also call for reconstruction; the term was an intellectual buzzword. Authors proposed reconstructing all sorts of things: theology, history, prehistoric races, universities, “bloated” capital in America, social habits that break down during a revolution, and the social organism itself.[17] Sociologist Lester F. Ward gives a succinct statement of the role of application in science when he states, “The true test of a science is the application of its principles to some useful purpose.”[18] That is, application does not follow the completion of scientific verification. In serving as the “true test,” application names the process of verification.

Addams’s, Dewey’s, and Ward’s understanding of this point is amplified in the theories of sociologists George Vincent, Albion Small, and Franklin Giddings, three sociologists Addams and Dewey knew well. University of Chicago sociologist George Vincent worked with Small, Addams, and other Hull House associates on sweatshop and child labor legislation. As president of Chautauqua, Vincent arranged for Addams’s many lectures with that organization.[19] In “The Province of Sociology” Vincent provides an annotated syllabus outlining the evolution of sociology and the functions of the new science. He recounts how physics and chemistry, in studying the inorganic world, were the first sciences to employ modern scientific approaches. In the nineteenth century biology became fully scientific when it employed evolutionary principles to study plant and animal organisms. Sociology was on the cusp of becoming truly scientific as it began to apply evolutionary principles to human social phenomena.[20] In addition to studying social statics and social dynamics, sociologists should use knowledge they had acquired thus far to construct “social ideals,” or projections of future configurations of social equilibrium. They should also employ social forces to move society toward those ideals.[21]

Albion Small coined the term “ideostatics” for the study of these projected social ideals. Because ideostatic projections are thoroughly based on knowledge of existing social statics and of social dynamic processes in the past and present, they are scientific rather than utopian.[22] Testing these ideals by participating in concrete reform activities is essential if sociology is to be genuinely scientific and avoid being reduced to “the purely clerical role of recording and classifying the facts of the past.”[23] Giddings emphasizes how individual personalities and the social environment reciprocally shape each other. To identify the dimension of social dynamic change sociologists should track, he asserts, “The function of social organization, which the sociologist must keep persistently in view, is the evolution of personality, through ever higher stages and broader ranges, into that wide inclusion and to that high ideal quality that we name humanity.”[24] For Giddings, all aspects of personality, including moral character, evolve in and through association with others.

Among settlement workers, Addams was not alone in considering settlement work a crucial element within the science of sociology. Herman F. Hegner, a cofounder of the Chicago Commons settlement house, considered the settlement’s methods to be thoroughly scientific. He writes, “The best that the scientific method can do is to interpret existing social tendencies and forces, and suggest methods and principles of amelioration and acceleration. But these principles and methods cannot be accepted until they have been thoroughly tested.” Hegner, with Addams, believed it was the task of social settlements to do this testing and thereby complete the scientific investigation.[25]

The vocabulary Addams used in previous essays to analyze specific social issues maps well onto Small’s, Vincent’s, and Giddings’s conceptions of sociology. Much of “The Subtle Problems of Charity,” for example, consists of detailed descriptions of social relations in the city and of how the personalities involved are affected. Addams gained this knowledge by living in the field. She notes that biologists who study equatorial plants cannot “use as material the dried plants of the herbariums.” Instead, they must go into the field, knowing it “means heat and scratches and the test of one’s endurance.”[26] Addams’s comment reflected a marked change in how scientific research was conducted by the late nineteenth century. Previously, collectors in the field gathered specimens and sent them to “armchair scholars” who analyzed and theorized their import. This included Charles Darwin, after his voyage on the Beagle. By the late nineteenth century naturalists and anthropologists considered it necessary to engage directly in fieldwork themselves. Encountering danger and enduring physical and mental difficulties was thought to build character and contribute to the reliability of the data obtained.[27] The perplexities Addams herself encounters are the “heat and scratches” that test her endurance.

Addams interprets her field data scientifically, that is, using an evolutionary lens to understand the city’s social statics. This analysis reveals the city’s social and moral geology, with people representing multiple layers, or “epochs,” of evolutionary development. This disrupts the city’s social equilibrium. The resulting maladjustments are manifest in the personalities of the poor who learn to game the system and in those of perplexed charity visitors who are tempted to abandon the work altogether. The social dynamics of this situation indicate movement toward association and social democracy. These trends are evident in efforts under way toward more humane living and working conditions. This social dynamic movement is also manifest in people’s emotions. When Addams writes in “The Subtle Problems of Charity,” “We find in ourselves the longing for a wider union” rather than simply saying, “We long for a wider union,” the more indirect formulation is deliberate and accurate. The same is true when she writes that the perplexities the charity visitor experiences are “forc[ed]” upon her by “our growing democracy.”[28] Addams had been using this syntactical construction throughout the decade to indicate the emotional impact of the moral impulse, the wave, the trend of the times on people’s personalities and perceptions.

For Addams, “social democracy” and “association” are ideostatic projections. They point toward the social equilibrium that would result if democratic practices and attitudes pervaded all social relations. Stated in technical sociological vocabulary, this ideostatic ideal will be achieved when the historical axis that charts social dynamic movement culminates in the geographical axis, or social statics, of a healthy democratic equilibrium. Stated more grandly in Giddings’s terms, this process would lead toward “wide inclusion” and the “high ideal” of humanity. To Addams, this is not a utopian dream. It is based on thorough data collection and interpreted in terms of social statics and social dynamics using evolutionary principles. This is the context in which to understand the “sterner and more enduring aspect” that Addams attributes to settlements.[29] The application of knowledge refers to that phase of scientific investigation in which well-supported hypotheses are used to design and carry out experiments to ascertain which methods of industrial, political, and social reform result in movement toward the ideostatic projection of social democracy. This is what settlements do. Their work is not ancillary to scientific research but constitutes a crucial phase within it. Many in her audience, as members of the Academy of Political and Social Science, would have understood her remarks this way.

Addams’s claim that the settlement’s reform work is both ethical and scientific mirrors Small’s contention that “sociology, in its largest scope, and on its methodological side, is merely a moral philosophy conscious of its task, and systematically pursuing knowledge of cause and effect within this process of moral evolution.”[30] Dewey makes the same point in “The Significance of the Problem of Knowledge.” When knowledge leaves the realm of transcendental metaphysics, it becomes a matter of social ethics, the intellectual umbrella under which Dewey places the social sciences. As constitutive parts of social ethics, the social sciences’ task is to “inquir[e] into . . . the particular values which ought to be realized in the life of everyone, and of the conditions which shall render possible this realization.”[31] This is precisely the task, Addams argues, that settlements carry out, and she calls it “the application of knowledge.” A healthy social organism is a democratic one; its social equilibrium will be attained as truth is embodied in “healthy and direct expressions of free living.”[32] Science is a tool of social ethics, a means of determining what methods result in these “healthy and direct expressions.”

Among social scientists in the United States, the belief that ethical considerations and “applied” testing belonged within the realm of science proper was widely held. The constitution of the American Economic Association stated that the purpose of “historical and statistical” economic research is to contribute to society’s progressive development.[33] In his 1895 presidential address to the Association for the Advancement of American Science, Daniel Brinton stated that anthropology is an applied science that aims to improve humanity by leading it toward a higher level of civilization. Anthropologists do this by discovering the laws of growth operative throughout the history of human social evolution and using them to make progress more smooth and sure.[34]

In Great Britain, Patrick Geddes made the same point. He scorned deductive, abstract social theories as prescientific, “the last surviving efforts of scholasticism.”[35] Like Addams, Geddes writes that with careful observation and in light of historical trends, one can detect “germs and buds already formed or forming” of future lines of development.[36] Much as studies of biology and chemistry form the basis for the arts of medicine and agriculture, so for Geddes, the geographical survey, by following these germs and buds, yields testable hypotheses about how to make the region more habitable and humane.[37] All these social scientists considered it their responsibility as scientists to use their knowledge in aiding social evolution to continue along a trajectory of growth toward social health. The ethical responsibility of scientists was fully internalized within the meaning of science itself.

Understanding what Addams means by the application of knowledge expands recognition of the capaciousness of Addams’s conception of education, discussed in the previous chapter. That the Labor Museum might be an appropriate mode of education for immigrant working-class adults was a hypothesis within Addams’s scientific experiments in the application of knowledge. She based this hypothesis on what scientists had discovered about the forces at work in social evolution and on data she had collected about the city’s moral and social geology. The Labor Museum was an experiment appropriate to the emerging phase of social democracy in being highly collaborative as it engaged members of every geological strata. Thus it met the criteria for scientific investigation at that time. Addams gives a quick example of education as the application of knowledge with her story about a student of Italian history. She asks whether he can take his knowledge of this history, connect it to the admiration local Italian immigrants had for Garibaldi, and use it to recognize how politicians twist that admiration to their own corrupt ends, as Johnny Powers did.[38] If the student can do that, his knowledge has been tested and verified within the context of life. He becomes, in words Addams borrows without attribution from Dewey, “a self-sufficing purveyor of reality” or, in Addams’s words, he has demonstrated that he can use knowledge synthetically by “bring[ing] it into use.”[39] She hopes that working-class immigrants, once they acquire knowledge of their social and historical value at the Labor Museum, will also be able to become purveyors of reality and put that knowledge into use by contributing to social and industrial reform.

Tolstoy’s Rhetorical Blazes

What was Addams to do with Tolstoy? He was an international celebrity; US literati made pilgrimages to his Russian estate. Addams had made hers in July 1896, just a few years before writing “A Function of the Social Settlement.” In Twenty Years at Hull-House Addams reports that in the month after the visit she read everything Tolstoy had written that had been translated into English, French, or German.[40] It is true that Addams examined Tolstoy’s ideas in developing her own, but just how Tolstoy influenced her is open to debate. Katherine Joslin proposes that Addams in her writing positioned Tolstoy as a literary character to represent ideas of his that matched her own.[41] The difficulty in assessing Tolstoy’s influence is that while some of their conclusions are similar, Addams disagrees with almost all of Tolstoy’s reasoning. Yet she does not criticize him in an easily identifiable way. In “A Function of the Social Settlement” Addams mentions Tolstoy only once and does not attribute any quotations to him. The essay, however, contains numerous quotations and paraphrases from several of his works. Examining how Addams uses his material rhetorically reveals that she takes insights she appreciates and repositions them in contexts Tolstoy abhorred to further her own argument. Her selective borrowing functions simultaneously as appreciation and as implicit critique. The material Addams borrows from Tolstoy fills out the conception of science within which the settlement’s role in the application of knowledge is an integral part of scientific investigation. With Tolstoy’s words Addams creates a literary expression of the ideostatic ideal of harmony within the habitat.

The quotation from William James that Addams inserts near the beginning of “A Function of the Social Settlement” suggests a way of naming how Addams uses passages from Tolstoy. Addams’s thinking in a large sense resonates with James on many levels. Both were pluralists who embraced a particularly wide expanse of experiences as legitimate material for philosophical reflection. They shared a sense of humor about the curious, balked ways of being that humans insist upon. Immediately after quoting Dewey, Addams tucks in two passages, quoted above, from “Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results,” James’s 1898 address to the Philosophical Union of the University of California in Berkeley. “Beliefs,” James states, articulating Peirce’s pragmatic principle, “are really rules of action.” The point of engaging in inquiry is “the production of habits of action.” The “ultimate test” of truth is “the conduct it dictates or inspires.”[42] A few paragraphs before these passages, James makes an extravagant promise. He claims he has in mind

a perfectly ideal discourse for the present occasion. Were I to set it down on paper, I verily believe it would be regarded by everyone as the final word of philosophy. . . . [E]veryone, on hearing it, would say, “Why, that is the truth! that is what I have been believing, that is what I have really been living on all this time, but I never could find the words for it before.

After going on a while in this vein, James apologizes:

I have tried to articulate it, but it will not come. Philosophers are after all like poets. They are path-finders. What everyone can feel, what everyone can know in the bone and marrow of him, they sometimes can find words for and express. . . . They are, if I may use a simile, so many spots, or blazes, blazes made by the axe of the human intellect on the trees of the otherwise trackless forest of human experience. They give you somewhere to go from. The give you a direction and a place to reach.[43]

The image of what “everyone can know in the bone and marrow” but hasn’t found words to articulate, was a familiar romanticist conception of what artists express in their artworks. It is the same one Tolstoy employs in his expressionist definition of art. James merely inflates it from the realm of art to cover truth per se.[44] What James goes on to do, without ever refuting this notion of truth directly, is to say in effect that truth is not the sort of thing that can be articulated in final form. That is, no philosopher could ever do what James initially pledged to do. Truth is a navigational tool. The most philosophers and poets can do, James admits, is to give “blazes” of insight to help people navigate the “otherwise trackless forest of human experience.”

Addams uses Tolstoy as a source for “blazes.” She borrows material from Tolstoy and, like James, uses it rhetorically as a step to what she wants to say. Like James, she neither endorses nor refutes Tolstoy’s theory of art but uses it to make an analogy that explains what settlements aim to do. Addams’s explanation is virtually lifted from Tolstoy (quoted and paraphrased passages in italics):

This then will be my definition of the settlement: that it is an attempt to express the meaning of life in terms of life itself, in forms of activity. There is no doubt that the deed often reveals when the idea does not, just as art makes us understand and feel what might be incomprehensible and inexpressible in the form of an argument. And the artist tests the success of his art when the recipient feels that he knew the thing before, but had not been able to express it, so the settlement, when it attempts to reveal and apply knowledge, deems its results practicable, when it has made knowledge available which before was abstract, when through use, it has made common that knowledge which was partial before, because it could only be apprehended by the intellect.

The chief characteristic of art lies in freeing the individual from a sense of separation and isolation in his emotional experience, and has usually been accomplished through painting, writing and singing; but this does not make it in the least impossible that it is now being tried, self-consciously and most bunglingly we will all admit, in terms of life itself.[45]

To emphasize how activity expresses the meaning of life more fully than artworks can, Addams includes a paraphrase of another passage from Tolstoy. She writes,

After all, the only world we know is that of Appreciation, but we grow more and more discontented with a mere intellectual apprehension, and wish to move forward from a limited and therefore obscure understanding of life to a larger and more embracing one, not only with our minds, but with all our powers of life. Our craving for art is a desire to appreciate emotionally, our craving for life is a desire to move forward organically.[46]

Just as artworks conjoin people through their shared experience of being infected by the artists’ expression of emotion, so, Addams claims, the settlement through activity conjoins people even more thoroughly. Art’s infection conjoins emotions; the infection of the meaning of life in terms of life adds a sense of “participation and responsibility” that enables people to “move forward organically.”[47] These phrases echo Addams’s earlier references to being caught in the wave, the moral impulse of social dynamic change.

Addams doesn’t explain why she capitalizes “Appreciation” or what she means in saying that the world of “Appreciation” is the only world we know. Perhaps, if this is not making too much of a word, she may have had Walter Pater’s collected essays, Appreciations, in mind, a source from which she occasionally took inspiration.[48] In his essay on Charles Lamb, Pater shows how Lamb’s humor and poetry reveal the poignancy of past customs and quaint ways that still find expression in the present. Pater writes,

Such gift of appreciation depends, as I said, on the habitual apprehension of men’s life as a whole—its organic wholeness, as extending even to the least things in it—of its outward manner in connexion with its inward temper; and it involves a fine perception of the congruities, the musical accordance between humanity and its environment of custom, society, personal intercourse; as if all this, with its meetings, partings, ceremonies, gesture, tones of speech, were some delicate instrument on which an expert performer is playing.[49]

Pater’s enumeration of what a person’s life consists is a lovely expression of the complexities Addams appreciated in her neighbors’ lives, even the ones living at the primitive level of the city’s moral and social geology. This literary depiction maps onto the wide scope of sociological data settlement workers need in order to carry out an “application of knowledge.”

Addams’s essay contains no hint of the stringent restrictions Tolstoy places on what he is willing to consider as art. He rejects as counterfeit most of the works included in any standard history of European visual or performance arts. These, Tolstoy claims, are produced to entertain people of privilege whose very existence is sustained by exploiting the serfs who grow their food and maintain their estates. Such art separates and estranges people. Only artworks that express feelings in accord with the “religious perception of the age” are worthy.[50] Tolstoy identifies the religious perception of his age in terms of his simple formulation of the Christian message, “the consciousness that our well-being, both material and spiritual, individual and collective, temporal and eternal, lies in the growth of brotherhood among all men—in their loving harmony with one another.”[51]

Addams repositions this idea, this “blaze,” in a context far removed from Tolstoy’s ideal vision of peasants living in loving, anarchic freedom. Her equivalent to Tolstoy’s religious perception of the age is movement toward democratic association as expressed in every dimension of the social organism. In moral perception, this takes the form of what she called “corporate consciousness” in an 1897 address to the Illinois Conference of Charities. Corporate consciousness includes the community’s acknowledgment of responsibilities that fall on the community as a whole, as well as a feeling of moral revulsion when these responsibilities are not met. That child labor and inadequate sanitation still persisted indicated that the community had not yet attained democratic corporate consciousness.[52] As she had in “Ethical Survivals” and “Subtle Problems of Charity,” Addams in “A Function of the Social Settlement” extends her critique to the actions and moral perceptions of morally upright, economically secure citizens. The public attention they give to alcoholism and family neglect, problems generally associated with poverty, is praiseworthy. Their failure to give equal attention to people of their own social standing who evade taxes and sway legislation toward their own interests is evidence of their “conscienceless citizenship.”[53]

It is also a failure of corporate consciousness, Addams contends, when a community’s schools and universities do not offer a curriculum that meets the needs of immigrant factory workers. Just as Addams in “First Outline of a Labor Museum” conceives of industrial machinery as “a social possession,” so in “A Function of the Social Settlement” she regards “all that civilization offers” as a common inheritance, which educated people should not hold as private possessions.[54] She disagrees with Tolstoy’s view that the art and science enjoyed by the wealthy and educated are counterfeit. Knowledge and the goods of civilization should be regarded as a public trust and made available to everyone. To make this point, Addams borrows many phrases from Tolstoy’s screed against evolutionary science and scientists. In What to Do? Tolstoy rails against the conception of society as an organism, calling out Comtean positivism and theories of evolution as particularly egregious. The crime? Political economists use these ideas to justify the division of labor, which Tolstoy thinks amounts to theft and slavery. The wealthy steal the labor of the peasants through taxation, rent, and high prices. This reveals how the wealthy are parasites who use science much as they use art, to encode the exploitation of the poor into all social institutions.[55]

Addams borrows a number of phrases from What to Do? (placed here in quotation marks, though unmarked in the essay) and with them chides scientists who, in an “idle thirst for knowledge,” tuck themselves away in laboratories, leaving it to intellectual charlatans, the “abortive outcasts of science” who profit from offerings that cannot genuinely teach the populace. Knowing virtually nothing of “their mode of life,” scientists ignore their “duty, not to study and depict, but to serve.”[56] Tolstoy had scorned a scientist who delivered a stiff lecture on the spectrum analysis of stars to an audience who lacked the most rudimentary knowledge of astronomy. Addams inserts Tolstoy’s example in her critique of how university extension classes fail to serve the immigrant working class. The public schools had also failed. Through their adult education classes Addams’s neighbors learned only facts and basic literacy skills. They learned nothing that could enable them to see how their labor in laying sewers made them valuable participants in the city’s social and industrial life. None of the city’s educational offerings were fully democratic because they could not convey to these workers how their labor contributed to sustaining the health and well-being of the social organism.[57]

Addams adapts Tolstoy’s criterion that art and science be universally available to all as another “blaze.” Unlike Tolstoy, she does not say that scientists and artists should only do work that uneducated peasants can understand. She transposes Tolstoy’s claim that art and science be available to all into the community’s responsibility to offer education suitable to all its members. “Simple people,” Addams writes, “want the large and vital—they are still in the tribal stage of knowledge.” They want to learn about “great things, simply told,” about the vastness of the heavens and the evolutionary history of people with six toes. They have little patience for the pedantic smallness of spectrum analysis or grass’s nutritional properties for herd animals.[58]

While today these remarks may sound condescending, they reflected the widespread movement in the second half of the nineteenth century to “popularize” science among working-class and middle-class people. At that time, “to popularize” had a positive ring and meant to make scientific knowledge accessible to nonscientists.[59] Scientists took this responsibility seriously. Thomas H. Huxley was particularly committed. Darwin endorsed Huxley’s efforts, writing to him, “I sometimes think that general and popular Treatises are almost as important for the progress of science as original work.”[60] Many women became involved in popularizing science, adapting the storytelling techniques of popular women novelists to convey scientific discoveries. The “evolutionary epic” was particularly popular in making visible evolution’s grand sweep, while avoiding its minutiae.[61]

Unlike many elites of the day, Addams does not see the presence of people presumed to be at the primitive stage of cognitive and moral development as a threat to the social order. Instead, their presence creates a responsibility of corporate consciousness. It is the community’s responsibility to enable them to see how they are integral to the community’s well-being. They, too, are deserving of “all that civilization offers,” and they deserve to have that conveyed to them in ways they can understand. Addams softens Tolstoy’s harangue considerably, admitting that it “is asking a great deal” of individual scientific investigators, busy with data collection and analysis, to perform this service for the immigrant working class.[62] Nonetheless, using science to serve the public good is a vital community responsibility. Settlements are in the position to carry out this responsibility.

*

Addams’s rhetorical strategy is to lift insights from Tolstoy’s writings out of the justifications he gives them and relocate them within a conception of social evolutionary progress that he rejects in toto. Why did she bother? Why did she not simply state her own thinking directly and point out where Tolstoy went wrong? Addams’s rhetorical moves dull the sharp edge of her critique, one firmly based in the science of the day. Today’s scholars are sometimes misled by her gracious presentations and conclude that Addams was more of a Tolstoyan than she in fact was.[63]

Addams’s rhetoric emerges from her synthesizing mind and her deeply held belief that right and wrong, in both moral and intellectual realms, are “confusedly mixed.” She was not interested in separating conceptual sheep from goats as a logical exercise. Addams’s remarks just a month before she presented “A Function of the Social Settlement” to the American Academy of Political and Social Science provide a quick illustration. To celebrate the opening of their new headquarters, the Chicago Woman’s Club sponsored a day devoted to Tolstoy’s work. In his address, Victor Yarros, Russian immigrant lawyer, partner of Clarence Darrow, and future Hull House resident, gave a strong critique of Tolstoy’s writings and beliefs. In her reply to Yarros, Addams stressed Tolstoy’s sincerity and commitment, commenting, “I meant to admit many things against him, but I cannot admit that Tolstoi is not conscientious.”[64] Sincerity and commitment were the traits she admired in Tolstoy, and she did not want intellectual sparring to clutter up what she considered most important. Addams created a rhetoric in which critique was present but veiled enough so as not to interfere with what she found most valuable.

Throughout her writings, and certainly in Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams’s aim was to shift her audiences’ moral perceptions. Directly countering their beliefs was likely to arouse their defenses rather than open them to new ways of thinking. Tolstoy had great stature with many in her audience; perhaps she wanted to speak to them without tarnishing their hero. Altering her audience’s sense of their own relationship to and responsibility for immigrants and the poor was a critical aspect of social reform. Tolstoy’s vision contained blazes potent enough to shift moral perceptions. With this rhetorical strategy Addams was able to peel back Tolstoy’s self-righteous posturing and his impossibly antiscientific tirades to reveal the blazes within. These blazes may have served to connect admirers of Tolstoy with Addams’s democratic vision.

Addams’s rhetorical use of Tolstoy in “A Function of the Social Settlement” is creative, but it is more than that. For Addams to define the function of a social settlement both as a step within scientific investigation and as performing the function of art reflects the era’s widely held assumption that science and the arts were engaged in a common endeavor. Many scientists paired their projection of future social evolution with an aesthetic conception of harmony. Geologist Joseph Le Conte defines evolution as “continuous progressive change,” where the “point of equilibrium itself” constantly moves upward toward “ever-increasing harmony.”[65] Darwin, Spencer, and Wundt understand social evolutionary progress in terms of expanding the sympathetic instincts toward universal harmony. Literature, as Eliot understands it, does the work of expanding the sympathies. Fine works of visual and musical art demonstrate what harmony of disparate elements looks and sounds like. The arts, as Tolstoy understands them, reveal how deeply personal emotions are in fact universal and thus serve to connect us all.

Figure 6. Free lectures on organic evolution, 1897. Hull House offered a steady stream of public lectures on a vast range of topics, including many in the sciences. HHC_0074_0100_001, Hull House Collection, Special Collections & University Archives, Courtesy of the University of Illinois at Chicago Library.

This era of the social sciences, as allied with literature and as internalizing ethics and social responsibility within the meaning of science itself, was short lived. By the 1920s views of theorists such as Small, Vincent, Giddings, Geddes, and others had disappeared from the definition and identity of the social sciences. Historian Andrew Abbott, in his history of the Chicago School of Sociology, uses early issues of the American Journal of Sociology as a lens for ascertaining the meaning of sociology at the discipline’s early stage. Abbott describes the journal, under the editorial direction of Albion Small, as the “academic avatar of the ramshackle empire of social welfare.” It was a “mishmash” of formal social theory, religious concerns, moral values, and practical social reform proposals.[66] Historian Dorothy Ross surveys the period in her rightly celebrated book, The Origins of American Social Science. She lays out debates among social scientists, giving due attention to claims regarding the moral responsibilities of science. In the 1920s, Ross notes, the social sciences became objective and professionalized by purging the scientists’ personal religious, ethical, or political biases from the newly constituted conception of the social sciences.[67]

Abbott and Ross are wrong to interpret the 1920s as the time when the social sciences stopped being muddied with extraneous ethical and reform-minded concerns and thereby became authentically scientific. Rather, the conception of science itself changed. What Abbott calls a “mishmash” was in fact coherent, structured by the scientists’ adherence to the evolutionary method. As this conception of science as historicist and evolutionary was abandoned, scientists’ ethical responsibility for social reform was cast out of the conception of what science meant.

In his survey of the history of social science, historian Theodore M. Porter observes that delineating the boundaries of the social sciences was not an issue until the 1890s. Initially, the meaning of sociology, as well as the term itself, came from French theorist Auguste Comte. He mapped the history of science onto the history of civilization’s progress and considered sociology as the last and highest science to evolve.[68] Nineteenth-century social scientists regarded their disciplines, Porter notes, as an “indispensable instrument of reform and the promotion of public welfare.”[69] To them, moral and social reforms were integral dimensions of their work as scientists. The idea that a social scientist should assume a detached, objective stance first began to emerge around 1900. It is anachronistic to use this standard to criticize social scientists’ reform efforts before or immediately after that date as “unscientific.”[70]

The turn from reform to detachment as defining the social sciences had a gendered dimension. Porter notes that in the late nineteenth century some women had prominent status as social scientists. He names Beatrice Potter Webb of England, Jeanne Weill (“Dick May”) of France, and Jane Addams of the United States as particularly noteworthy.[71] Historian Rosalind Rosenberg writes that during its first decade since opening in 1892, the University of Chicago had a significant number of women students enrolled in graduate study. In 1900 women received 20 percent of the doctorates awarded, more than three times the national average.[72] Rosenberg documents how increased professionalization of the disciplines was accompanied by gender segregation. University leaders deliberately worked to make the theoretical social sciences more masculine. Thinking that women were less interested in theoretical questions than in “practical” reform and ethically minded pursuits, they split social work and sanitary science from sociology and created separate and gendered departments.[73]

While many men were involved in the settlement movement, it was a female-dominated domain. Many women active in Chicago’s settlement houses were also affiliated with social science departments at the University of Chicago.[74] With this turn, their stature and Addams’s as social scientists was erased, and the settlement’s role as the culminating step within the process of scientific investigation was deleted. One could say that Democracy and Social Ethics, at the time Addams wrote it, was a scientific work. Its status as such changed two decades later when the conception of science within which Addams wrote was abandoned. It is not our call whether Addams, Dewey, Small, Vincent, Giddings, Geddes, Ely, Brinton, and many, many others of the era were unscientific in locating social ethics and social reform within the meaning of science itself. It was their call, and we need to acknowledge that what they meant by science is what science meant at the time for a significant number of recognized and respected members of the scientific community.

Clarifying the import of Dewey’s and James’s quotations in “A Function of the Social Settlement” and Addams’s selective use of material from Tolstoy leads to a unified interpretation of the essay. Early in the essay Addams states that settlements are established “with a desire to use synthetically and directly whatever knowledge they, as a group, may possess, to test its validity and to discover the conditions under which this knowledge may be employed.”[75] “Whatever knowledge they possess” includes the vast interrelated web of historical, contemporary, and experiential knowledge that Addams brought to bear in each of her inquiries and proposals about social reform. Using this knowledge synthetically means incorporating the power of the arts to alter moral perceptions and create emotional bonds among disparate peoples. Addams uses the words of an acknowledged literary giant to align the arts and the settlement’s social reform efforts within the then widely held recognition of the application of knowledge as verification, the culminating step of a scientific investigation.

For Addams, the most important test of a hypothesis’s validity was whether it could advance the social organism toward a healthy democratic equilibrium; that is, the test was experiential. Addams saw the social organism that was Chicago in the 1890s as a moral geology, layered with primitive people and those highly sophisticated, and with deep divisions between rich and poor. Settlements located themselves at the point of greatest challenge for testing social dynamic movement toward democracy. They experimented with ways of incorporating into the social fabric those who had benefited least from civilization’s advance and enabling them to become contributors to the social equilibrium’s health. Settlements, in effect, posed the question of whether democracy, understood as incorporating and valuing the contributions of everyone, could include those at the bottom of the moral geology.

This is a daring notion of democratic equality, especially at a time when intellectuals rejected the Enlightenment abstraction of universal moral equality as preevolutionary and unscientific. Realizing how daring it is further subverts an easy reading of the dominant narrative of Anglo-Saxon advance with others trailing behind. Addams’s notion of equality here is not that of equal opportunity for all to rise or of lifting up those at the bottom to equalize people’s social status, although Addams certainly endorsed those things. This is not the equality of her essays earlier in the decade, to reconstruct feudal survivals into practices of social democracy, although she still advocated for that. This is the question of whether social meanings and cultural valuings could be reconstructed so that even “primitive people” who worked with their hands in factories could come to be regarded and welcomed as full participants and essential contributors to the health and well-being of the whole community, that is, as fellow scientists and artists themselves. Democracy and Social Ethics was written in the service of this reconstruction. “A Function of the Social Settlement” points the way toward making this possible.

Chapter 7

Constructing Democracy and Social Ethics

Reviewers praised Democracy and Social Ethics as “startling, stimulating and intelligent”; “striking, interesting, and full of illuminating bits of realism”; and “sane, full of wide sympathy and suggestive.” These alliterative clips advertising the book appeared in Philadelphia’s Public Ledger, Chicago’s Evening Post, and the New York Tribune. The book was widely reviewed across the United States and in England.[1]

Addams’s most beloved quotations come from the book’s brief introduction. It is “gemlike”; its sentences “sparkle with condensed wisdom,” as Knight describes it.[2] Its most beautiful passages drape Addams’s wisdom in the guise of observation:

We are learning that a standard of social ethics is not attained by travelling a sequestered byway, but by mixing on the thronged and common road where all must turn out for one another, and at least see the size of one another’s burdens. To follow the path of social morality results perforce in the temper if not the practice of the democratic spirit, for it implies that diversified human experience and resultant sympathy which are the foundation and guarantee of Democracy.[3]

We have learned as common knowledge that much of the insensibility and hardness of the world is due to the lack of imagination which prevents a realization of the experiences of other people. Already there is a conviction that we are under a moral obligation in choosing our experiences, since the result of those experiences must ultimately determine our understanding of life.[4]

Oxford professor and Fabian socialist Sidney Ball thought Addams’s book was the most valuable of those offered by Macmillan’s Citizen Library of Economics, Politics, and Sociology. He found it “an exceedingly suggestive book,” not in the solutions it offered, but in “the statement of the problem.”[5] This description is apt. The parameters of its keywords—individual ethics, social ethics, experience, and Democracy (always capitalized)—are suggestive; they elude easy definition. Little in the book is new. Aside from the introduction and the final two pages that serve as a coda, the book’s content is taken from Addams’s previous essays. What is new is Addams’s substitution of individual ethics (or individual morality) and social ethics (or social morality) for the historical axes she had used in the essays. This new conceptual framework, imposed on the essays with minimal revision, fits awkwardly. Tension remains between the British socialist and the German anthropological historical axes she had used previously.

With this new conceptual frame, Addams in the introduction asks her readers to move beyond individual ethics by redirecting their moral sensibilities and energy toward social ethics and working for concomitant reforms in industry, politics, education, and family relations. Addams positions the household employer, the industrial employer, the college woman’s parents, the charity visitor initially, and political reformers as holding to codes of individual ethics.[6] Individual ethics, she writes, addresses obligations to family and friends. However, these alone are no longer adequate for the present configuration of society. It is not easy to attain social ethics, but unionizing workers, college-educated young women, and the charity visitor are moving toward it.

Since the contents of Addams’s 1890s essays have been thoroughly explored in the previous chapters, this chapter focuses on Addams’s use of individual ethics and social ethics as the book’s conceptual frame. The terms present a puzzle. As conceptual categories “individual ethics” and “social ethics” were short lived in Addams’s writings. While the words appear occasionally in her 1890s writings, she did not use them to name central ethical categories. She does not use them in subsequent books as structuring concepts, although many of the ideas tucked into them persist. In fact, references to democracy virtually disappear from Addams’s writings after Newer Ideals of Peace (1907).[7]

A reasonable hypothesis is that Addams searched for an organizational scheme that could give her previously written essays some unity and coherence while appealing to a wide audience. As she told her editor, Richard Ely, she wanted the book to be “popular and colloquial in style.”[8] Albion Small thought that writing for lay audiences was a professional obligation of the sociologist. He writes, “This mission of the thinker is so to work on the popular mind that everyday judgments of values will tend to correct themselves by ultimate standards. No sociological perspective is correct unless it turns out at last to have a place for the angle of vision which belongs to people at different posts in the social process.”[9] In Democracy and Social Ethics Addams fulfills this obligation. By adopting individual ethics and social ethics as organizing concepts, Addams was able to speak to a general audience, as well as to the social evolutionary theorists, social gospelers, and participants in the ethical culture movement, who a decade earlier had heard their own voices reflected in “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements.” Addams imbues the text with enough energy to mask its conceptual discontinuities.

The Lineage of “Individual Ethics” and “Social Ethics”

Addams experimented with organizational frames in a number of lecture series she gave between 1898 and 1900. In each set of lectures she used content from her 1890s essays. For the series’ titles, she tried out “Ethical Survivals” at Iowa College in March 1898 and “Ethical Survivals and Intimations in Social Ethics” in Davenport, Iowa, in November 1899.[10] Between them she tucked in “Democracy and Social Ethics” in the summer of 1899 as the title for her lectures through the University of Chicago Extension Program.[11] Although the titles for three lectures at Chautauqua in August 1900 highlighted “Democracy,” their contents focused on how education, industry, and domestic service were configured during the feudal era and how their persistence as feudal survivals caused current dislocations. Addams could have given her book the unwieldy title “Ethical Survivals and Intimations of an Evolving Social Democracy.”[12]

To many reviewers, Democracy and Social Ethics read as a work of sociology.[13] Sentences in the introduction often begin with constructions such as “Men and women have realized . . .”; “We are learning . . .”; “There are many indications . . .”; “We have learned . . .”; and finally, that the book is about people “who are being impelled by the newer conception of democracy.”[14] What today’s readers hear as Addams’s prophetic voice, academic reviewers heard as her sociological voice.[15] Addams is clear that she is investigating the social landscape for signs indicating the direction of social dynamic change. She states explicitly that in searching for a democratic social ethics, “what we are really searching for is a moral dynamic.”[16] By choosing Democracy and Social Ethics as the book’s title, Addams, in effect, merges the two bodies of social evolutionary theorizing she used in the 1890s. “Democracy” names the culminating achievement of social evolution for the Fabian socialists, while for German historicist social scientists, “social ethics” names the most recent phase in the evolution of morality.

The terms “individual ethics” and “social ethics” can be traced to the influence of German historicism on many American progressives. In the last quarter of the nineteenth century, large numbers of American students undertook graduate study in Germany. Many of them studied with Gustav Schmoller, Adolf Wagner, Karl Knies, and others of the German historical school of economics.[17] It was not until the twentieth century that students could obtain an equivalent education in the United States in programs generally patterned on the German model.[18] A large number of the progressives with whom Addams worked had studied in Germany with members of the German historical school of economics. These included economists Henry Carter Adams, Richard Ely, Simon Patten, and Edwin R. A. Seligman; influential settlement workers Emily Greene Balch, Edward Devine, and Mary Kingsbury Simhkovitch; and sociologists E. A. Ross and W. E. B. Du Bois, as well as members of the University of Chicago Department of Sociology including George Herbert Mead, William I. Thomas, Albion Small, Charles Zueblin, and Charles Henderson.[19] Addams did not attend university in Germany, although she had spent considerable time there in the 1880s and spoke and read German.[20]

Many of these progressives rejected individual rights and liberties as democracy’s defining identifiers and reconceptualized democracy in terms of social interdependencies and social ethics. Historian Axel Schäfer attributes this switch to the time they spent studying in Germany.[21] Like the Fabian socialists, members of the German historical school rejected both laissez-faire and Marxist economics and believed that economic and ethical principles are artifacts of historical and cultural evolution. Like Wilhelm Wundt, from whom Addams derived her understanding of primitive morality, members of the historical school held that morality evolved out of primitive customs. Now, as society was becoming densely interdependent, a new mode of ethics, “social ethics,” was needed. Individual character and self-realization needed to be detached from the realm of purely personal endeavors and firmly embedded within the well-functioning of the whole.[22] German intellectuals in a range of disciplines gave the terms “individual ethics” and “social ethics” a prominent place in their writings.[23]

Richard T. Ely, Addams’s editor for Democracy and Social Ethics, worked closely with Karl Knies of the historical school while studying in Germany.[24] Addams included Ely’s book, The Labor Movement in America, on the bibliography for her University of Chicago lectures.[25] Ely and his colleagues who founded the American Economic Association patterned it on the Verein für Socialpolitik, established by members of the German historical school of economics.[26] Reflecting his years in Germany, Ely considered economics as the historical study of distribution and production over time. The problem with laissez-faire economics, Ely notes, is that it only examines economic behavior during a restricted time period, while economists should search for larger patterns of growth and development over time.[27] These principles of growth express the purpose of economics in ethical terms, which Ely defines as “the most perfect development of all human faculties in each individual, which can be attained.”[28] For Ely, economics and social ethics are inseparable. The older systems of ethics were concerned with the virtues of the individual. Now that society is understood as an organism of interdependent parts rather than a collection of solitary individuals, it is time for social ethics to replace individual ethics. Here Ely cites work of German historicist legal scholar Rudolph von Jhering, who identified social ethics as the “queen” of the social sciences. Economists’ ethical responsibilities include working toward large-scale changes in economic and political institutions so that ethical ideals expressed by social ethics become functionally embedded within the social organism.[29]

In Studies in the Evolution of Industrial Society, Ely writes, “The slow development of social ethics is admirably described in ‘Democracy and Social Ethics,’ by Jane Addams.”[30] Like her German historicist counterparts, Addams looks for patterns of change that signal the growth of a new ethic. She points in the book’s introduction to the “many indications that this conception of Democracy is growing among us” as evidence that democracy as social ethics is emerging within the social organism’s changing configuration and as such is “a rational development of life.”[31]

In the introduction Addams points toward the same psychological impacts of living through a time of social dynamic change that she had explored in her 1890s essays. Much of her vocabulary is historicist. Addams begins by observing that many of her contemporaries meet their ethical obligations to family members and near acquaintances as a matter of customary habit, sustained by their “common fund of memories and affections.”[32] The fact that they experience “a mental attitude of maladjustment” and “a sense of divergence between their consciences and their conduct” indicates that they have “caught a moral challenge raised by the exigencies of contemporaneous life.”[33] Yet they lack “an adequate social motive”; that is, they do not have an analogous fund of memories and affections that could knit them within the larger society. Until they get that, they can be considered “selfish,” although the term needs redefinition. Inserting an unattributed quotation from George Bernard Shaw, Addams writes, “Such people ‘refuse to be bound by any relation save the personally luxurious ones of love and admiration, or the identity of political opinion, or religious creed.’”[34] This is the same conception of selfishness Addams attributed to George Pullman. He was selfish not because he was greedy but because he isolated himself from the texture of his workers’ lives. Likewise, people need to walk along “the thronged and common road” to activate their sympathetic instincts. They need “contact with the moral experiences of the many” in order to accumulate a fund of memories and affections that will connect them intimately with people throughout the social organism. Social ethics is thus not a “sentiment” or feeling, or a “creed” to espouse, but a matter of how one carries out one’s life, day by day.[35]

Read in light of her 1890s essays, Addams’s vocabulary in Democracy and Social Ethics is largely historicist and evolutionary, but with some insertions that would appeal to social gospelers and to participants in the ethical culture movement. The thinking and rhetoric of these latter groups were heavily inflected with social evolutionary theorizing, whether of the British socialist or German historicist variety. It is not surprising that Addams could move so easily among their various vocabularies and thought patterns.

Historians locate Richard Ely as prominent in the social gospel movement.[36] This was a movement, primarily among liberal Protestants in the United States and England, seeking to change religion’s focus from individual salvation to what they called “social salvation.”[37] Religiously motivated charity, social gospelers claimed, was inadequate to counteract the disabling effects of rapid industrialization driven by predatory capitalism. Their mandate was to bring about the Kingdom of God on earth, where justice, mercy, and economic sufficiency for all would prevail.[38] Addams worked with a number of people prominent in the social gospel movement, including Washington Gladden, Josiah Strong, George Herron, Vida Scudder, Frances Willard, and Reverdy Ransom. Walter Rauschenbusch admired her.[39]

Richard Ely’s economic writings are infused with social gospel language. To Ely, Jesus’s second commandment, “Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself,” gives eloquent expression to the social duties upon which God will mete out divine judgment. Following this commandment certifies one’s claim to truly love God. When the implications of this commandment are spelled out, they equate with sociology.[40] The purpose of the American Economic Association, Ely explains, “is to study seriously the second of the two great commandments . . . and thus to bring science to the aid of Christianity.”[41]

Democracy and Social Ethics contains little explicitly religious language. One reviewer regretted that Addams had no place in the book for religion at all, although another thought it was “worth a theological library.”[42] Contemporary historians often locate Addams within the social gospel movement, although their assessments sometimes have a “yes, but” tinge to them.[43] R. A. R. Edwards ascribes to Addams a religious faith lacking creed and doctrinal content. Gary Dorrien assigns her to “the secularizing stream” of the movement.[44] Addams includes a few brief passages that social gospelers would appreciate. They would read the book’s first sentence, with its reference to those who have “hungered and thirsted” after “righteousness,” in light of the beatitude “Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.”[45] A few paragraphs later Addams redescribes this hunger and thirst in historicist terms, referring to how people experience a sense of maladjustment in response to social dynamic change. Also, early in the introduction Addams casts individual and social ethics in biblical terms, noting, “The one test which the most authoritative and dramatic portrayal of the Day of Judgment offers, is the social test. The stern questions are not in regard to personal and family relations, but did ye visit the poor, the criminal, the sick, and did ye feed the hungry?” Social gospelers would hear echoes from Matthew’s gospel in this passage, although Addams attributes it to an unnamed recent German critic.[46]

References to righteousness and the Day of Judgment were also familiar to the reform Jews who founded the Society for Ethical Culture. Columbia University economist Edwin R. A. Seligman, like Ely, had studied with Karl Knies in Germany. With Ely, he was among the founders of the American Economic Association. His father, Joseph Seligman, worked with Felix Adler to establish the Society for Ethical Culture in 1877, and in 1880 Edwin Seligman succeeded his father as president of the New York Society.[47] Seligman congratulated Addams on Democracy and Social Ethics, writing, “It is long since I have read so sane and so inspiring a book. . . . The central theme—the necessity of a social basis for all moral advance—is so entirely in harmony with my own views.”[48]

Stanton Coit, Felix Adler’s protégé and a leader of the ethical culture movement in Great Britain, had recently released an edited volume, Ethical Democracy: Essays in Social Dynamics. Addams commented to Ely on the book’s “fine chapters.”[49] Its essays’ authors shared Addams’s conceptual orientation of social evolution toward social democracy. Coit’s essay in particular exudes the moral fervency of Addams’s introduction. To reinforce how morality belongs to the sphere of action, Addams inserts an unattributed quotation from Coit’s essay into the book’s coda, writing, “It is insanity to expect to receive the data of wisdom by looking on.”[50] In a quotation attributed only to “a shrewd English observer,” Addams borrows words from future prime minister J. Ramsay MacDonald’s essay to make the point that it is through the masses that “social ideals enter into political programmes.”[51] MacDonald expands on how it is time to move from the “atomic individualism” of the political phase of democracy and replace it with “organic individualism” within the “cooperative commonwealth.”[52]

Given that many among the educated, book-reading public were already familiar with the language of individual and social ethics, Addams made a good choice to organize her material around these terms rather than using “ethical survivals” as her theme. Addams may well have found during her lecture series that “individual ethics” and “social ethics,” paired with “Democracy and Social Ethics” as a title, simply “worked” better with her audiences. “Individual ethics” and “social ethics” are more capacious terms than “ethical survivals.” They speak more deeply to readers by giving their imaginations greater range.

The meanings of “individual ethics” and “social ethics” in Democracy and Social Ethics overlap considerably with the territory Addams had assigned to historical axes in the essays. “Individual ethics” covers attention to the needs of those with whom one has familial relationships, a central dimension of feudal ethics. Addams stretches its meaning to include well-intentioned bourgeois charity visitors and political reformers who lack experiential knowledge of working-class immigrants. Addams had experimented with including Tolstoy in the individual ethics camp. In “The Individual Effort,” a lecture in her University of Chicago series, Addams notes how Tolstoy abandoned his aristocratic privileges and tried to meet his ethical obligations by living with and as his peasants. The problem with Tolstoy and Tolstoyan communities, Addams concludes, is that they represent the “naturalistic” view. By contrast, social settlements, which were making “a sustained and democratic effort to apply their ethical convictions to social and industrial conditions,” represent the “historic” view.[53] Her contrast reflects the distinction Darwin made between systems of classification naturalists had devised based on observed similarities among organisms and his proposed classification based on descent, writing that “all true classification [is] genealogical.” Addams simply substitutes “historic” for “genealogical,” which was widely recognized as an equivalent term.[54] Perhaps she decided Tolstoy’s “naturalistic” ethics could not occupy a place within her social evolutionary pattern. She saved this material for her chapter titled “Tolstoyism” in Twenty Years at Hull-House.[55]

“Social ethics” likewise becomes an expansive term in Democracy and Social Ethics, covering institutional structures as well as psychological ones. Like the Fabian socialists, Addams includes restructuring social, economic, and political arenas within its domain. As Addams explains, changes in social ethics must be secured through legislation and legal enforcement.[56] The growth of labor unions, legal regulation of wages and workplace safety, opportunities for higher education, nonhierarchical voluntary associations, and inclusive political practices all mark the growth of social ethics. Also, individuals experience social dynamic changes within their own psyches. Thus movement from individual to social ethics entails restructuring personality and character, as German historicists maintain.

Addams integrates the institutional and the psychological domains through the concept of “corporate consciousness.” The term comes from Herbert Spencer. In assessing the strength of the analogy between an individual organism and the social organism, Spencer writes that an animal as an individual organism has “corporate consciousness” because its central nervous system integrates its various parts. The social organism has no analogous nervous system and thus lacks corporate consciousness, as each individual in society retains his or her own individual consciousness.[57]

In contrast to Spencer, Addams does ascribe corporate consciousness to the social organism. In “Growth of Corporate Consciousness,” her 1897 address to the Illinois Conference of Charities, she defines the term as “the sum total of the compunctions and strivings in regard to the affairs for which the community as a whole is responsible.”[58] For Addams, corporate consciousness evolves historically. In the fifteenth century, when peasants danced within hearing of the Inquisition’s torture chambers, only their pleasure was disturbed, not their consciences. This could not happen in the late nineteenth century, Addams declares, because our corporate consciousness has evolved to the point that such brutality could not be stomached. She calls for corporate consciousness to be extended to children then stunted and injured by premature labor. To bring this about, corporate consciousness needs to penetrate citizens’ personalities until the industrial exploitation of children is so deeply repulsive as to be unthinkable.[59] Although the term “corporate consciousness” does not appear in Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams expresses this idea in other ways. Her discussions of working-class people, charity workers, educators, employers, and politicians are replete with calls for changes in people’s perceptions and sensibilities to match concomitant changes in institutional structures.

Revising the Essays for Democracy and Social Ethics

The two patterns of reasoning Addams employs in her 1890s essays, British accounts of the phases of democracy’s evolution and German anthropological accounts of moral evolution, are each coherent, given their assumptions. In trying to merge them under the same conceptual framework of individual and social ethics, their coherence becomes muddied. Like painting over embossed wallpaper, Addams smoothed out some bumps while letting others continue to protrude. Movement from individual to social ethics has the impress of a historical axis but a flattened one.

Some scholars read Democracy and Social Ethics as evidence of Addams’s elusive and evocative imagination. Katherine Joslin, for example, presents Addams as a cross-dressing Cassandra who blends masculine logic with feminine intuition, describing the latter as an “irrational, subconscious, even mystical source of knowledge.”[60] However, scrutinizing how Addams revised the essays reveals strategic and analytical choices rather than quasi-mystical imaginings. Addams faced the dilemma writers confront when they try to integrate materials produced over a span of time into a uniform work. This is not simply a task of cleaning up past instances of fuzzy thinking. Underlying conceptual frameworks and assumptions may have shifted in the interim. The most honest alternatives are simply to reproduce the old texts with the caveat that they carry the marks of time or to use them as notes for a whole new work. Evidently Addams did not want to do the former and lacked the time required by the latter. Her editors pushed back against her desire to revise the book for its second printing.[61]

Addams may have been following her own advice about not taking so long to hone one’s theories that one neglects immediate needs that call for amelioration.[62] To Addams, writing was a form of ethical activism. If Democracy and Social Ethics could be of immediate use, better to publish patched-up versions of the essays than take the time to produce a conceptually cleaner work. The result is that Democracy and Social Ethics is full of insights but lacks a consistent, coherent line of reasoning. Addams’s patchy strategy becomes evident by examining how Addams revised each essay.

The salient feature of “A Belated Industry” is the contrast Addams makes between the ethics correlated with the feudal, household-based system of production and the ethics appropriate for a system of production centered in industrialized factories. It is clear that Addams regards the late nineteenth-century practice of employing live-in domestic servants as a feudal survival. Addams’s several references to “the trend of the times” reinforce that she is making an evolutionary argument. History has moved out of feudalism and into the era of associated effort, and society’s code of ethics must be revised concomitantly. “Democracy” and its cognates do not appear in the essay.

In revising this essay for the chapter “Household Adjustment” in Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams changes the contents very little; the primary changes were word substitutions. She replaces “feudal ethics” with “individual and family codes” and “undemocratic ethics” and describes the mistress-servant relationship as “undemocratic” rather than as “feudal.”[63] She softened the historical character of the argument by beginning with a hazy reference to how civilization initially grew out of small family units. In noting that women since the beginning of time have been associated with duties to home, the book chapter diminishes the import of women’s roles in the economic system based on the feudal household.[64] Addams replaces most references to “the trend of the times” and “associated effort” with references to “our increasing democracy” or “our theories of democracy.”[65]

The effect of these few wording changes is to lessen if not eliminate the reader’s awareness that Addams is making an evolutionary argument about movement between two historically significant systems of economic production. “Individual ethics” lacks the penumbra of associations that “feudal ethics” carries with it. The essay “A Belated Industry” is a story about well-intentioned, generous women whose deficiency is that they have not kept up with the times. With these few wording changes, the book chapter “Household Adjustment” turns into a story about affluent women who are at least negligently unthoughtful if not cruel to those they employ. It becomes a story about individuals’ moral deficiencies rather than about large historical and cultural shifts and the ethics appropriate to each phase.

In revising “A Modern Tragedy” for Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams depersonalizes the story. She removes George Pullman’s name, referring instead to “the man who owns the capital,” or the “president” of a “large manufacturing company,” and expands her critique of philanthropy.[66] Addams pulls the stories of the feudal families of King Lear and St. Francis out of her discussion of modern industry and moves them into “Filial Relations,” the revised version of “The College Woman and the Family Claim.” In making these revisions, Addams masks the underlying evolutionary argument that positions Pullman as a feudal survival in the era of associated effort. In the original essay Addams makes no mention of democracy or its cognate terms. She makes some references to individual virtues, but they are subsumed within the ethics of the aristocratic, feudal family. Under the feudal system, the feudal lord’s “philanthropic” obligation to ensure his workers are fed, housed, and protected is undifferentiated from his “economic” responsibility to make his land productive.

Under capitalism these responsibilities are split. The employer’s responsibility is to make the enterprise economically productive. To do more than this becomes a separate matter of nonobligatory, voluntary philanthropy. Thus, the overall effect of Addams’s revisions is that the unified, evolutionary argument of “A Modern Tragedy” becomes disjointed in the chapter “Industrial Amelioration.” The book chapter reads as presenting separate critiques of industry and of philanthropy as then practiced. These critiques are connected only by the thin thread that both capitalist and philanthropist follow a code of individual ethics, and both are undemocratic in their failure to adopt social ethics.

Contemporary readers who assume capitalism’s solidity as an economic system expect Addams to make one of two sorts of argument, but neither alternative makes sense of the book chapter as a whole. One the one hand, Addams could fully take the workers’ side, using some variant of a socialist or Marxist perspective. This would make her discussion of philanthropy tangential. Her warning that workers must include employers as equal partners in their efforts would make little sense. Alternatively, Addams could support the right of capitalists to set the conditions for work, while also praising employers for going beyond their economic responsibilities and acting philanthropically. Read this way, Addams seems at best to be asking employers to treat their workers somewhat better and listen to them occasionally. Addams’s critique in “A Modern Tragedy” is powerful because it is set within Webb’s and Kirkup’s accounts of industrial capitalism as a temporary moment of social disequilibrium. With this setting removed from the book chapter, Addams’s observations about industrial employers’ tactics and psyches are little more than interesting comments.

Inserting King Lear’s story into the book chapter “Filial Relations” was an easy move. When Addams originally wrote “The College Woman and the Family Claim,” she borrowed phrases she had used in “A Modern Tragedy” to describe Lear and Cordelia and attached them to the parents and their daughter.[67] The salient contrast is between the parents’ older and more narrow family claim and the daughter’s attempt to find a newer “human claim,” which is a “higher” and “universal” social claim.[68] “Democracy” is not mentioned.

With Lear’s family and St. Francis’s family moved into “Filial Relations,” a reader already alerted to the ethics of feudalism and to the propensity of late nineteenth-century theorists to make evolutionary arguments might guess that Addams is making such an argument. Otherwise, the chapter reads like a story about the dangers—or the liberatory potential—of higher education for young women. The old-fashioned, affluent parents want their daughter to maintain traditional gender roles. The daughter, awakened by her college studies, wants to become a part of the wider world. Without knowing that the chapter gives a gendered and psychological complement to the Fabians’ account of British social evolution, it is reasonable to interpret the chapter as primarily autobiographical, with implications for other young women who find themselves similarly placed.[69]

In the three chapters discussed so far, even if the feudal character of individual ethics is not recognized, the reader still has a sense of chronological movement from individual to social ethics. This can be read as development within one person or perhaps a change between one generation and the next. Holding onto this sense of chronological movement becomes more difficult in the remaining three chapters. Readers can make some sense of how charity visitors and political reformers might advance from individual to social ethics. Their expectations of conceptual coherence, however, stumble against Addams’s representation of her immigrant neighbors as holding to an anthropologically primitive form of morality.

The chapter in Democracy and Social Ethics titled “Political Reform” has virtually the same content as “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption” except for a few introductory paragraphs and the book’s coda in the final two pages. Addams removed Wilhelm Wundt’s name, but she kept most of his unattributed quotations and the evidence from his book that marked her neighbors’ morality as primitive. In the introductory paragraphs, however, Addams’s use of the book’s key terms creates confusion, as she describes the alderman as representing both individual and social ethics. She writes that the corrupt alderman, by responding to what the people want, is “giving a social expression to democracy” as he “minister[s] directly to life and to social needs.”[70] In the next paragraphs this point gets twisted. Given the varied nationalities of the alderman’s immigrant supporters, their basis for agreement about their needs is “founded upon universal experiences which are perforce individual and not social.” What they admire in the alderman are his “individual virtues,” and they are “unable to perceive social outrages which the alderman may be committing.”[71]

When these statements are examined closely, clarity escapes. Addams seems to be saying that the alderman holds to democratic social ethics, even though his social outrages should count as evidence against this assessment. His supporters’ needs are social because they are shared, and they are also not social but individual, because they are universal. These statements taken together do not cohere. However objectionable one finds Addams’s attribution of primitive morality to her immigrant neighbors, the conceptual framework of the original essay is clear and consistent. Addams’s attempt in the book to shoehorn primitive ethics into the more highly evolved forms of individual and social ethics makes it impossible to read the chapter as a conceptually unified whole.

Almost all of the content from “The Subtle Problems of Charity” is also in the chapter “Charitable Effort” in Democracy and Social Ethics. Addams keeps the copious evidence that the poor hold to a different ethical code than the charity visitor. She cut material from a very few paragraphs, but the cuts are crucial. Without them, the book chapter tells a different story than the essay. In the essay the thesis statement is easy to find, placed right near the beginning. Addams states that the essay will show how the charity worker’s perplexities can be “trace[d]” to “ethical survivals” that she and her clients hold, and she will “suggest” how the charity worker’s perplexities might “be prophetic.”[72] In other words, the clients and the charity worker are both following outdated ethical codes. This causes the charity worker to be perplexed, and her perplexities may be indicative of impending dynamic changes in the social organism. Addams cut the thesis statement from the book chapter. The reader is left with the frustrating task of trying to figure out what the chapter, absent a thesis, is really about.

Two other passages Addams cut from the essay contain crucial information that signal how Addams was working with Wundt’s evolutionary history of morality. She keeps the sentence about how the Charity Organization Society’s standards are unscientific because they are not based on evolutionary principles.[73] She cuts the essay’s detailed explanation of what this means, as well as her remark that the charity workers and her clients belong to different “ethical epochs.”[74] Addams also cuts the passage where she steps away from the charity worker and voices her own, more conceptually sophisticated perplexities.[75] This leaves the impression in the book chapter, though not in the essay, that Addams identifies herself with the charity visitor.[76] In the essay the evolutionary relation between the clients’ primitive ethics and the charity worker’s more advanced ethics is clear. It is also clear that Addams’s more sophisticated perplexities cannot be resolved during a time of social dynamic transition. These points are not clear in the book chapter, leading some commentators to interpret it as a straightforward rejection of COS methods and a call that they be replaced with the settlement’s democratic methods.[77]

The outcome is that the book chapter, “Charitable Effort,” is “full of interesting anecdotes,” in the words of one reviewer.[78] However, the chapter lacks the conceptual clarity of the essay. Readers might glean the impression that the poor, given their spontaneous generosity and self-sacrifice, are in these respects more ethically advanced than the charity visitor. This impression, though, clashes with Addams’s statement in both the essay and the book that “the evolutionists tell us” that these traits are expressions of an early “rude rule of right and wrong.”[79] She does not name her specific source, but Darwin used this phrase to describe the primitive social instincts that humans inherited from their gregarious animal ancestors.[80] As in the chapter on political reform, Addams’s juggling act of praising some aspects of her neighbors’ primitive ethics while calling for social ethics creates conceptual confusion.

The book chapter “Educational Methods” gives the same message as the essays on which it is based, “First Outline of a Labor Museum at Hull-House, Chicago” and “Foreign-Born Children in the Primary Grades.” As in these essays, Addams in the book chapter stresses that factory workers need consciousness of their social value. They need a form of education that will give them a historical and contemporary appreciation for how they are embedded in and contribute to the well-being of the whole.[81] Social ethics demands this, and its absence is evidence of the society’s lack of democracy.[82] In the stirring words of the chapter’s introductory paragraphs, “because every human being is a creative agent and a possible generator of fine enthusiasm,” an education of this sort would foster “greater freedom, strength, and subtilty of intercourse and hence an increase of dynamic power.”[83] Addams cites several attempts by business and technical schools to educate members of the working class. These give a small number of workers the knowledge and skills to leave factory work and become engineers or business managers. These schools do not give to the workers themselves knowledge of how their own labor provides essential benefits to the well-being of the entire society.

Addams does not discuss the Labor Museum in this chapter; perhaps the experiment was too recent. She devotes two paragraphs to an attempt at “democracy of commerce” made by an unnamed manufacturing company in Dayton, Ohio. Its annual stereopticon presentations informed the employees about the countries around the world with which the company does business.[84] Addams does not mention the company’s employee benefit program that in 1900 was the most highly developed in the nation. In addition to above-average wages and clean working conditions, John H. Patterson, president of National Cash Register (NCR), provided his employees with housing, transportation, recreational facilities, and health care. Educational offerings included frequent lectures, apprenticeships, a variety of classes, and a library. Patterson also established a settlement house on company grounds, with activities and classes for the employees’ families.[85] Addams knew about all this. In May 1898 she toured the NCR factory and spoke to the employees. The NCR newsletter rated her “first” among the eighteen hundred visitors that week who came “to see whether this was really the model factory of the world.”[86]

Why does Addams not praise NCR’s very extensive worker education offerings? The only hint is her concluding statement that the annual stereopticon presentations were “a crude example of what might be done in the way of giving a large framework of meaning to factory labor and of putting it into a sentient background.”[87] While it is risky to interpret silence, this brief comment reinforces how Addams’s conception of education centered on the workers’ embeddedness in the social organism, more than on offering classes and lectures per se. What was most important to her was that workers gain consciousness of their social value and that they feel appreciated by others for their contributions to the well-being of the whole.

One book reviewer made a connection between the unnamed presidents of the unnamed companies in the chapters “Industrial Amelioration” and “Educational Methods.” Union members at NCR were still on strike when Democracy and Social Ethics went to press. The strike’s end was negotiated in March 1902 with help from the National Civic Federation, in time for the reviewer for Gunton’s Magazine to bring out the parallels between Pullman and Patterson. Following Addams’s analysis, the reviewer writes that Patterson, like Pullman, ruled his company as a medieval baron, using methods that could not work in these now democratic times.[88]

The net effect of adopting individual ethics and social ethics for the book’s conceptual framework while making few revisions is that Addams’s historicism is dampened and conceptual coherence is not achieved. Those among Addams’s contemporaries for whom evolutionary theorizing pervaded the intellectual air they breathed would have detected Addams’s historicism. To them, “individual ethics” and “social ethics” were evolutionary terms. The book retains key terms from the essays such as social organism, motive and motive-power, and primitive instincts. These indicators, plus Addams’s syntax and her choice of quotations, would have enabled them to fill out an evolutionary interpretation of Democracy and Social Ethics. Academic reviewers read Democracy and Social Ethics this way.[89] Richard Ely recognized that Addams was telling an evolutionary story. In one of his essays he writes that in Democracy and Social Ethics, “we shall find this struggle illuminated with the light of genius and a meaning given to apparently blind gropings.”[90] Scholars today generally assume that “individual ethics” and “social ethics” are alternative ethical stances rather than an evolutionary sequence. They associate individual ethics with Enlightenment liberal traditions such as Lockean individualism or Kantian autonomy and position Addams’s social ethics as an alternative theoretical framework.[91] They are not aware that Addams, with many of her contemporary intellectuals, had rejected the abstract ideas of the Enlightenment as preevolutionary and unscientific, and so would not define the evolutionary phase of “individual ethics” in terms of Enlightenment abstractions.

Figure 7. Jane Addams in NCR Women’s Dining Room, May 1898. Addams is in the center of the photograph facing forward, with the large hat. On the left (Addams’s immediate right) is NCR attorney Amy Acton, the first woman lawyer to be hired by a corporation. The man at the table next to Addams is NCR president John H. Patterson. Note the flags hanging from the ceiling that indicate the global reach of the NCR company. Courtesy of the Collections of Dayton History.

Readers today rarely have the knowledge to interpret Addams’s historicist clues, and they let them go by virtually unnoticed. The effect is double edged. This study of how Addams constructed Democracy and Social Ethics elevates Addams’s standing as an intellectual and scientist by demonstrating with specificity how, in her own time, Addams made full use of the resources of the dominant intellectual discourse of the day. At the same time, showing this raises troubling questions. The historiography the discourse assumed and the science it relied on are now outdated. Most of the theorists who worked within the paradigm are ignored today with good reason. The voices we remember most championed imperialism and white supremacy and used the discourse to justify unspeakable violence. The conceptual fuzziness of “individual ethics” and “social ethics” has had the effect of masking Addams’s historicism and thus has skirted discussion of how Addams made full use of the discourse.

However, more than Addams’s historicism is dampened by her use of “individual ethics” and “social ethics.” The book’s chapters stand in jarring contrast to the introduction’s glowing paean to Democracy. The examples of ethical growth Addams gives are so tentative that it is difficult for the reader to be convinced of even the possibility of movement from individual to social ethics. The college-educated daughter and the charity visitor seem to have made progress, but Addams leaves them still engulfed by their perplexities. George Pullman and the employers of domestic servants don’t seem to have moved beyond their own self-absorbed goodness. Neither the voters supporting Johnny Powers nor the reformers seeking to oust him seem to have changed their minds or tactics at all. In a book generally considered optimistic, none of the stories have happy endings.

To advocate that “the cure for the ills of Democracy is more Democracy” and that maladjustments resulting from individual ethics will be set right by adopting social ethics has the effect of filtering out the suffering and genuine tragedy encountered along the way. People respond to the challenges and pain of perplexities in a variety of ways. Some avoid perplexities by holding rigidly to familiar conventions; some are psychologically disabled by them. Near the end of the book Addams admits as much. She asserts that the path toward social ethics is not for those who are “timid and irresolute.” It is not for those who hesitate to travel alongside “cruder men” who push forward “irrationally and emotionally.”[92] Her phrases echo the passage in “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement” where she describes union members as “groping for the right, with horny, calloused hands.”[93] Even if one is girded with great moral courage, the path’s difficulty is compounded by Addams’s observation that “the power to distinguish between the genuine effort and the adventitious mistakes is perhaps the most difficult test which comes to our fallible intelligence.”[94] As in the earlier essay, “right and wrong are most confusedly mixed,” and self-distrust rather than confidence must accompany our every judgment.[95] In practice it is impossible to know whether one’s efforts fall within a trajectory toward ethical progress. One’s most courageous, thoughtful efforts may turn out to be “adventitious mistakes” and one can never know which it is until the aftermath. Pragmatists call this “fallibilism,” and Addams delivers a stiff dose of just how treacherous fallibilism is. The path toward social ethics threads through an exceedingly thin needle.

Why does it have to be so hard? Why does one need so much psychological resilience to advance toward social ethics? When Addams wrote Democracy and Social Ethics, she was old enough to know, with Eliot, that the path toward justice is troubled, that it is a “steep highway of tolerance, just allowance and self-blame.” She was still young enough, though, to feel the allure of “the path of martyrdom and endurance.”[96] Youthful enthusiasm tints life’s sufferings with hope for future possibilities. Thirty years later, when she was nearly seventy, Addams reflected on what older people, marked by life’s “slow stain,” might contribute to social well-being. In a display of self-distrust, she admits that their “garnered wisdom . . . may turn out to be no wisdom at all.”[97]

The Paradox of Democracy and Social Ethics

Can a single work meet academic expectations for theoretical rigor while also speaking to the heart? Those who reviewed Democracy and Social Ethics were aware of this tension. Edwin L. Shuman, writing for Chicago’s Herald Record, thought Addams succeeded at both. While the book is “not a dogmatic treatise,” he notes, it is “written in the true spirit of scientific inquiry, and at the same time with a breadth of tolerance and catholicity to be attained only by sympathetic association with all classes of people.”[98] The Chicago Tribune called Addams “the most conspicuous experimenter in the social settlement line in this city” and said the book’s philosophy was “as gentle, as patient, as sincere, and as astute as Jane Addams herself.”[99] A reviewer for the Mail Times of Des Moines, Iowa, was more doubtful. While Addams approached each topic with “the profoundest sympathy, insight, and fearlessness,” the reviewer was concerned that she had left technical sociological terms vague and undefined.[100] A reviewer from New York was simply grateful that the book was “refreshingly free from the customary academic limitations.”[101] Tolstoy’s translator, Aylmer Maude, thought the book wasn’t free enough. He wished Addams had expressed her ideas with more “brevity and ‘snap.’”[102]

Here is the paradox of Democracy and Social Ethics. By allowing the book to be conceptually untidy, Addams produced a richer, more enduring text. Written at a time when science and art interpenetrated, Democracy and Social Ethics is a work of both science and artistry. Writing, for Addams, was another mode through which to carry out the function of the social settlement. Hull House was a scientific enterprise, as science was understood by the German historical school and its offspring in the University of Chicago Department of Sociology. To these scholars, all organisms, including themselves, are inside evolutionary processes. Their actions inevitably contribute to future social harmony or disharmony. To be a scientist was to accept the obligation to investigate the trends of social evolutionary development and act to further those trends toward a healthy and harmonious social equilibrium. Hull House likewise was an experimental effort to identify these trends and, through its activity, shape future evolution toward social flourishing.

Just as the justification for scientific explorations was ethical, so was the aim of art. As a sociologist, Addams wrote to present her experimental findings, as good scientists do. As an artist, her aim, with Eliot, was to elicit sympathy and, with Tolstoy, to unite people through shared emotional experience. Even though these conceptions of science and art belonged to the nineteenth century, their purposes are ones we still hold: sympathetic connections with others and social health and harmony. Addams’s rhetorical skills enabled her to transcend the confines of the intellectual paradigm within which she worked in ways few of her contemporaries could match.

William James writes that the stream of consciousness, like the life of a bird, “seems to be made of an alternation of flights and perchings.”[103] Most theorists write about the perchings, those points on the map where signposts are placed. They give directions: start here, go there. Mazzini says to begin with duties to family, then circle out to nation and beyond to all of humanity. Sidney Webb says to begin with feudalism and go from political to industrial and social democracy. Wundt says to move from primitive to civilized morality. These perchings are now hopelessly out of date and thus uninteresting to most people today. Yes, Addams gives us the perchings of individual and social ethics, but these are suggestive enough that readers can find them in their own streams of consciousness. Much of Democracy and Social Ethics is about flights, about movement, as Addams explores the “relationships which democracy has . . . pulled askew.”[104] Theorists today give us new perchings, but the experiences of flight, of process, of being pulled askew are ones we encounter every day.

Addams’s words shimmer with meaning, some intended, some lit by readers’ imaginations. By defining individual ethics and social ethics loosely, Addams widened the entrance to her thought, encouraging readers to participate in creating the text’s meanings. By doing so, Addams met the criteria Eliot advocated: “We value a writer not in proportion to his freedom from faults, but in proportion to his positive excellences—to the variety of thought he contributes and suggests, to the amount of gladdening and energizing emotions he excites.”[105] Today, few people read Arnold Toynbee, Sidney Webb, Wilhelm Wundt, or Richard Ely, except for specific scholarly purposes. By contrast, scholars in many fields find rich materials in Addams’s writings that challenge and stretch their own explorations. Students who would find Addams’s intellectual sources intolerably dusty read Democracy and Social Ethics and come to care more about social justice and to cultivate sympathetic understanding for those whose lives follow rhythms different from their own.

When Addams’s rhetoric soars, it touches us deeply because she lived within the particularities that kept her words tethered to the ground. Addams could write, “A man who takes the betterment of humanity for his aim and end must also take the daily experiences of humanity for the constant correction of his process” because she lived that way.[106] Addams gave to her immigrant neighbors the loving attention to the minutiae of how lives go that Darwin gave to his specimens and that Eliot gave to her characters. She shared their streets and frequented their markets. She knew their names. She visited their homes and was honored to be their guest. She found it worthwhile to spend her adult lifetime among them and to seek to understand them on their own terms, with all their varied strengths and failings. In Addams’s stories, their humanity and her own shine through.

When contemporary scholars, unaware that Addams wrote within the discourse of social evolutionary theorizing, state that Addams believed this, intended that, or thought such and such, their claims should be read as academic shorthand rather than historical attribution.[107] These authors are pointing toward the meanings and insights they have gleaned in Addams’s writings, and they use the conceptual frameworks of their own disciplines to shape their analyses. While these attributions are not historically accurate in a strict sense, this scholarship is invaluable. Over the past few decades Addams scholars have effectively laid to rest the previous view that Addams was primarily a popularizer who reformulated other people’s ideas for general audiences.[108] They have demonstrated that Addams was an intellectual in her own right by showing how her ideas stand when examined within intellectual paradigms now used in their academic disciplines. Maurice Hamington is right to place Addams next to contemporary care ethicists, even though it is anachronistic to call her one.[109] Judy D. Whipps is right to question whether Addams’s conception of democracy is adequate for the challenges posed today by postcolonial feminists, even though it is ahistorical to expect an affirmative answer.[110] Wendy Sarvasy and Carol Nackenoff are right to use literature on civic republicanism and civic engagement to assess Addams’s contributions, even though Addams herself did not use these frames.[111] We need insights from writers of the past in order to formulate, challenge, and enrich our own thinking about the issues of our own time.

In the book’s penultimate paragraph Addams pairs “the cry of ‘Back to the people’” with “the prophet’s demand for repentance” and with “the religious cry of ‘Back to Christ.’” Early in the twentieth century Addams’s democracy spoke to evolutionary scientists, humanists, and social Christians. Today it speaks to those who profess democracy’s subsequent iterations. William James wrote to Addams that he had read the book with “deep satisfaction.” It is “one of the great books of our time,” he notes and then adds, “The religion of democracy needs nothing so much as sympathetic interpretation” of the various social classes to each other. He concludes his letter with these words: “But just whither the said religion of democracy will lead, who knows? Meanwhile there is no other, in human affairs, to follow.”[112] James writes about the religion of democracy as a leveling up. Democracy counts people’s lives by their “common inner meaning” and not by their “outer gloriousness and show.”[113]

In the book’s final paragraph Addams imbues this leveling up with religious tones. Democracy could fulfill the essential function of religion, just as the Religion of Humanity did for Comte and universal kinship did for Wilhelm Wundt. This function is not of an external power sustaining the universe or of the promise of the soul’s eternal life. Democracy, Addams writes, gives “the assurance that the dead understand, because they have entered into the Great Experience.” In this life, “all life’s fretting comes of our limited intelligence.” We will never understand fully, we will never be released from perplexities. Yet when we bolster what understanding we do have with mercy and forgiveness, we can glimpse the peace and freedom that come when we enter the Great Experience. Addams offers another “blaze” from Tolstoy of how the living can sometimes glimpse this peace. She recounts how in Tolstoy’s short story “Master and Man,” the wealthy aristocrat, caught in a snowstorm, experiences “an ineffable sense of healing and well-being” as he wraps his body around his servant and then dies.[114]

This was what Dante saw reflected in the living light of God’s presence.[115] It is what Maggie Tulliver sensed before perishing, when in the storm she feels “strong resurgent love” for her brother, as “all the artificial vesture of our life is gone and, we are all one with each other in primitive mortal needs.”[116] It is what King Lear experienced when in his madness he “put himself in the place of ‘the poor naked wretches’” personified in Tom, the Bedlam beggar. And thus, Addams writes, Lear “came to a larger conception of life.”[117] This larger conception is not achieved through rational activity or personal achievement, or even through social reconstruction, but by circling back to what is most primitive within us.

Addams and her contemporaries needed consolation. Addams herself experienced her mother’s death when she was two and her sister Martha’s when she was six. Her father died shortly after her college graduation and her sister Mary during the Pullman strike.[118] The nation, not yet four decades removed from the Civil War, still mourned the deaths of all those who had entered the Great Experience too soon. For those who find eternal verities no longer consoling, Addams gives an alternative. She writes in the book’s final sentence, “Consciously to accept Democracy and its manifold experiences is to anticipate that peace and freedom.”[119] Here Addams offers what no amount of conceptual coherence can give.

Acknowledgments

Addams was right. We are interdependent beings, entwined within families and communities who nourish and shape who we are. My work on Addams owes much to my colleagues in the Department of Philosophy and throughout the University of Dayton who appreciate the value and the difficulty of interdisciplinary teaching and research. Most formative has been my participation the university’s Core Program. Teaching in the program’s fifteen-credit sequence for first-year students that integrates history, philosophy, religious studies, and English has recast my intellectual sensibilities. I have drawn daily on faculty members’ creativity and expertise and gained sustenance from those moments when students recognize that learning can cross as many disciplines as life.

I have spent many fruitful hours at the University of Dayton’s microfilm reader. Many thanks to the University Library for purchasing the eighty-two reels of the Jane Addams Papers, 1860–1960 (Microfilm), a collection of documents gathered by Mary Lynn McCree Bryan and her colleagues during the 1970s and 1980s. Cathy Moran Hajo of Ramapo College is now guiding the effort to digitize and update the collection, which will make it widely and freely available (janeaddams.ramapo.edu).

The Society for the Advancement of American Philosophy has been my philosophical home. Its members regularly model scholarship that is both rigorous and imaginative; they have long encouraged my fledgling attempts to work out my readings of Addams’s texts. One of the society’s many strengths has been its stance that American philosophy extends beyond classical American pragmatism and embraces the philosophies of all peoples of the Americas, philosophies often born through trauma and struggle. I deeply thank Charlene Haddock Seigfried for her persistent efforts to make feminist pragmatism integral to the society’s vision. She was the first to see philosophical significance in my work on Addams; her support has been unflagging.

This project began with a fellowship from the National Endowment for the Humanities to trace how Addams developed her thinking about pacifism. I am most grateful to the endowment for giving me time to discover the deeper and more daring notion that the key to Addams’s intellectual orientation lay in the social evolutionary theorizing of her day. Any views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of the National Endowment for the Humanities.

I am grateful to colleagues who read the manuscript in whole or substantial part. Scott Pratt, Lisa Heldke, and John Kaag gave me sound advice on how to sustain unifying themes. Special thanks go to Jane Zembaty and Patricia Johnson for their comments on the manuscript, and most of all for orienting the University of Dayton’s Department of Philosophy to welcome scholarship on women not thought worthy of philosophical recognition. Louise W. Knight’s painstaking eye caught historical inaccuracies and awkwardly constructed paragraphs. The book echoes her enthusiasm for history and rhetoric. My fellow writing group members, Ellen Fleischmann and Anthony W. Smith, cast critical eyes while envisioning possibilities, a perfect pairing.

I thank the two anonymous reviewers for the University of Chicago Press for pointing out where the manuscript needed to be strengthened. Much credit is due to Karen Merikangas Darling for her editorial wisdom and to all members of the team at the University of Chicago Press for skillfully shepherding the manuscript from first read to publication.

All errors herein are my responsibility; there would have been many more but for my students and colleagues.

A long-standing debt of gratitude is to Cory and Kyle, who enjoyed the children’s biographies I read to them three decades ago. We discovered Jane Addams together.

Notes

Introduction

1. 1. Hamington, Social Philosophy of Jane Addams, 80. In her introduction to the Illinois Edition Charlene Haddock Seigfried gives an extensive and sophisticated analysis of how Democracy and Social Ethics is pragmatist in form and content.

2. 2. For Addams’s comments on sweatshops, see “Settlement as a Factor,” 139. For “tendency to barbarism and degeneracy,” see Newer Ideals of Peace, 11. For “deep-set racial impulses” and “primitive human urging,” see “Women and War,” 78. For people “who are being impelled” see Democracy and Social Ethics, 9.

3. 3. Kuhn, Essential Tension, xii.

4. 4. James, Principles of Psychology, 1:255.

5. 5. Kuhn, Essential Tension, xii.

6. 6. See Knight, Citizen; Brown, Education of Jane Addams; Joslin, Jane Addams.

7. 7. For public administration, see Stivers, “Civic Machinery for Democratic Expression”; for urban planning, see Flanagan, “City, Still the Hope of Democracy?” For new methodologies for social science research, see Rosiek and Pratt, “Jane Addams as a Resource”; Wilkinson, “On the Task of Making Social Inquiry”; Gross, “Collaborative Experiments”; Gillberg, “Methodological Interpretation”; Schneiderhan, “Pragmatism and Empirical Sociology.”

8. 8. For discussion of communitarianism, see Whipps, “Jane Addams’s Social Thought”; for cosmopolitanism, see Sarvasy, “Global ‘Common Table’”; Green, “Social Democracy.” For essays on Addams and citizenship, see Nackenoff, “New Politics for New Selves”; Winkelman, “Working Democracy”; Anders and da Silveira Nunes Dinis, “Demonstrating Citizen Leadership.” For democratic rhetoric, see Danisch, Pragmatism, Democracy, chapter 3; Duffy, “Remembering Is the Remedy.”

9. 9. For feminist ethics of care, see Hamington, Embodied Care, chapter 4. For feminist aesthetics, see Bonomo, “Addams’s Philosophy of Art.” For feminist perspectives on the environment, see Heldke, “Community Gardeners or Radical Homemakers?”; Keith, “Natural Caring.”

10. 10. Knight, Citizen, 404.

11. 11. Knight, Citizen, 392–404; Knight, “Jane Addams’s Theory of Cooperation,” 65–86.

12. 12. Hamington, Embodied Care, 1–4, 97–120.

13. 13. Seigfried, introduction to Democracy and Social Ethics, xiv.

14. 14. Seigfried, introduction to Democracy and Social Ethics, ix–xxxviii.

15. 15. Seigfried, “Democracy as a Way of Life”; Seigfried, introduction to Democracy and Social Ethics; Seigfried, “Social Self”; Hamington, Social Philosophy of Jane Addams; Sarvasy, “Engendering Democracy.”

16. 16. Knight, Citizen, 404.

17. 17. Seigfried, “Social Self,” 142.

18. 18. Seigfried identifies Addams as one of “a long line of feminists . . . whose lives provided material for their theories and who tested the cogency of theories against their lived experience” (introduction to Democracy and Social Ethics, xiii). Hamington agrees, writing that Addams’s philosophy “came from the streets of Chicago” and was “derived from her experiences” (Social Philosophy of Jane Addams, 33, 80).

19. 19. The classic study of the relation between pragmatism and evolutionary thinking is Wiener, Evolution and the Founders of Pragmatism. See also Schneider, History of American Philosophy, chapter 6; Richards, Darwin and the Emergence; Nungesser, “Evolution of Pragmatism”; Pearce, Pragmatism’s Evolution. McGranahan, in Darwinism and Pragmatism, gives an extended presentation of how James interacted with Darwin’s thought in developing his own thinking.

20. 20. Bowler, Non-Darwinian Revolution, 5, 73; Hale, “Rejecting the Myth,” 15. Richards argues that Darwin’s conception of natural selection was itself progressive (Meaning of Evolution, 84–90, 113–114).

21. 21. Kellogg, Darwinism Today, 3–5.

22. 22. Bowler, Non-Darwinian Revolution, 3.

23. 23. Stocking, Race, Culture, and Evolution, 112; Bowler, Non-Darwinian Revolution, 113.

24. 24. These “bloody readings” were reinforced by Richard Hofstadter’s highly influential portrayal of social Darwinism in Social Darwinism in American Thought, a view still being advanced in 2018 (see, for example, D. Marshall, “Sociology’s Contentious Courtship with Biology: A Ballad,” the introductory essay to the Oxford Handbook of Evolution, Biology, and Society). Hofstadter’s reading has been challenged. See Bannister, Social Darwinism; Brautigam, “Sorting Out Social Darwinism.” Several scholars have also challenged the view that Spencer was a staunch supporter of laissez-faire economics, arguing instead that his conception of freedom issued from his reading of William Godwin’s anarchism. See Richards, Darwin and the Emergence, chapters 6–7; Francis, Herbert Spencer and the Invention of Modern Life; Hale, Political Descent, chapter 2; Offer, Herbert Spencer and Social Theory.

25. 25. Late nineteenth-century theorists discussed in this book who used social evolutionary thinking but were not social Darwinists in Hofstadter’s sense of the term include Albion Small, Richard Ely, Benjamin Kidd, Frederic Harrison, Sidney Webb, Beatrice Webb, Thomas Kirkup, and Patrick Geddes, among others.

26. 26. For discussions of what constitutes a discourse community, see Hollinger’s chapter titled “Historians and the Discourse of Intellectuals” in In the American Province; Kloppenberg, “Thinking Historically.”

27. 27. See Bevir’s edited volume, Historicism and the Human Sciences in Victorian Britain. The volume’s essays discuss topics such as race, literature, moral character, history, political economy, empire, international law, life, and language. In his introduction to the volume, Bevir discusses the ubiquity of historicism in the nineteenth century and the range of forms it took (“Historicism and the Human Sciences”). See also Lightman’s essay “Life” for how evolutionary science was “the unlikely driver of the historicizing of nineteenth-century thought” (21).

28. 28. Darwin, Origin of Species, 6th ed., 435.

29. 29. Darwin, Origin of Species, 1st ed., 426.

30. 30. R. Young, Darwin’s Metaphor. See chapter 4, especially 80–99, 112–113.

31. 31. Hawkins, Social Darwinism, 118.

32. 32. H. Marshall, War and the Ideal of Peace, 47.

33. 33. Hale, Political Descent, 1–3.

34. 34. Pollock, Oxford Lectures, 41.

35. 35. See Peirce, “Evolutionary Love”; Le Conte, “Note on the Religious Significance”; Bozeman, “Joseph Le Conte.”

36. 36. The term “social sciences” is problematic. Bevir prefers “human sciences” to “social sciences” when talking about late nineteenth-century historicist thought. He points out that “social sciences” carries the connotation of being “modernist-empiricist” rather than historicist in character and thus is not well suited for social theorizing during the Victorian era (Bevir, “Historicism and the Human Sciences,” 16–19).

37. 37. Richards, “Biology,” 31.

38. 38. Le Conte, “Theory of Evolution and Social Progress,” 481, 483.

39. 39. Kidd, Social Evolution, vii.

40. 40. Richards, “Biology,” 17–18.

41. 41. Pater, Appreciations, 65.

42. 42. For Harrison’s and Morley’s visits to Hull House, see Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 114. For the Webbs’ visit, see Linn, Jane Addams, 194.

43. 43. As examples, see Seigfried, introduction to Long Road of Woman’s Memory, x, xxxiiin27; Hamington, Social Philosophy of Jane Addams, 111.

44. 44. Taylor, Citizenship and Democratic Doubt, 83. In this passage Taylor is quoting Elshtain’s description of how Addams wrote. See Elshtain, “Return to Hull House,” 266.

45. 45. Taylor, Citizenship and Democratic Doubt, 80.

46. 46. Knight, Jane Addams, 157; Joslin, Jane Addams, 94.

47. 47. See Knight, Citizen, 94–95, 98–99. I thank Knight for encouraging me to read Addams rhetorically.

48. 48. Bain, English Composition and Rhetoric, 245.

49. 49. Hill, Principles of Rhetoric, 394; J. Newman, Discussions and Arguments, 293. For a helpful account, see Johnson, Nineteenth-Century Rhetoric.

50. 50. See McDougall, Introduction to Social Psychology, 44; James, Principles of Psychology, 2:393.

51. 51. M. Marshall, Contesting Cultural Rhetorics, chapter 5.

52. 52. Wickberg, “What Is the History of Sensibilities?,” 669.

53. 53. Wickberg, “What Is the History of Sensibilities?,”, 665–666, 679–680. See also Abruzzo, Polemical Pain.

54. 54. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 146. She had used this example in an 1897 address to the National Educational Association (“Foreign-Born Children,” 107). Addams includes many examples of this sort in The Spirit of Youth, chapter 3. Here she attributes the perceived juvenile delinquency to young people’s instinctive spirit of adventure.

55. 55. James, Principles of Psychology, vol. 1, chapter 9; Wallas, Human Nature in Politics, 99.

56. 56. Addams, Second Twenty Years, 148. Shelley, in A Defense of Poetry, writes, “We want [i.e., lack] the creative faculty to imagine that which we know; we want the generous impulse to act that which we imagine; we want the poetry of life; our calculations have outrun conception; we have eaten more than we can digest” (37).

57. 57. Hackett, “Hull House—a Souvenir,” 73.

58. 58. Danisch, Pragmatism, Democracy, 66.

59. 59. Personal communication with Louise W. Knight. Knight interviewed McNary in Madison, Wisconsin, June 14, 2011. McNary was an intern at Hull House 1934–1935. I thank Knight for permission to include this quotation.

60. 60. Addams, New Conscience, 81.

61. 61. Ely to Addams, Oct. 13, 1906; Addams to Richard Ely, Oct. 15, 1906.

62. 62. Du Bois, Souls of Black Folk, 38. The phrase is from Wordsworth, “Ode on Intimations of Immortality,” and reads, “Shades of the prison-house begin to close upon the growing Boy.”

63. 63. James, “Moral Equivalent of War,” 168, 169.

64. 64. Fischer, “‘Moral Equivalent of War.’”

65. 65. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 21.

66. 66. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 68–76.

67. 67. I develop this point in chapter 6 on Addams’s essay “A Function of the Social Settlement.”

68. 68. Seigfried, “Democracy as a Way of Life,” 12.

69. 69. The relation between Addams’s and Dewey’s methods is discussed in chapter 2 of this book.

70. 70. Dewey to Alice Chipman Dewey, Oct. 10, 1894.

71. 71. Addams, New Conscience, 81.

Chapter One

1. 1. Samuel A. Barnett to Addams, Dec. 26, 1892.

2. 2. Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings, 1–7, chapter 2.

3. 3. In Atlantic Crossings Daniel Rodgers discusses the networks of social reformers that spanned the Atlantic. Addams’s name comes up frequently throughout the book.

4. 4. Addams took two tours of Europe, the first in 1883–1885 and the second in 1887–1888. For an extensive description of her time there, see Addams, Selected Papers, 2:197–227, 480–518.

5. 5. Meacham, Toynbee Hall and Social Reform, 44, 50–53. For Addams’s visit to Toynbee Hall, see Knight, Citizen, 166–175; Addams, Selected Papers, 2:491–498. For a discussion of Victorian thought that provided the context for Toynbee Hall, see Carson, Settlement Folk, 1–9.

6. 6. Reed, Black Chicago’s First Century, 27–30. Reed writes that although the historical record is not fully established, Pointe du Sable was most likely born free in Haiti or in Canada.

7. 7. Pacyga, Chicago, 18, 30–34, 71; Bross, History of Chicago, 64.

8. 8. Pacyga, Chicago, 70, 30.

9. 9. Pacyga, Chicago, 70–71. For general histories of immigration to the United States, see Daniels, Coming to America, and Higham, Strangers in the Land.

10. 10. Knight, Citizen, 179; Brown, Education of Jane Addams, 217; Electronic Encyclopedia of Chicago, s.v. “Demography” (by Walter Nugent), http://www.encyclopedia.chicagohistory.org/pages/962.html (accessed Jan. 13, 2017).

11. 11. Some of the international guests whose visits to Hull House Addams mentions in Twenty Years at Hull-House include Catherine Breshkovsky (230), Frederic Harrison (114), John Morley (114), Benjamin Kidd (114–115), Peter Kropotkin (230), and Thomas Masaryk (138).

12. 12. Knight, Citizen, 248, 252–259. The two lectures were published in the Forum in October and November 1892, under the titles “Hull House, Chicago: An Effort toward Social Democracy” and “A New Impulse to an Old Gospel” (Knight, Citizen, 258).

13. 13. Adams, introduction, vii–viii.

14. 14. In his chapter on Hegel, James writes, “Any author is easy if you can catch the centre of his vision” (Pluralistic Universe, 44). See Stocking, Race, Culture, and Evolution, 112. For discussion of the views of Fabian socialists that Addams drew on extensively, see Hale, Political Descent, 194–196.

15. 15. Spencer, “Social Organism,” 54. For recent discussions of late nineteenth-century uses of the idea of a social organism, see H. Jones, Victorian Political Thought, 78–91; Offer, “New Reading of Spencer”; Donald N. Levine, “Organism Metaphor in Sociology.”

16. 16. Small, “Organic Concept of Society,” 89. For Small serving on the Chicago Civic Federation with Addams, see Linn, Jane Addams, 163.

17. 17. Small, “Organic Concept of Society,” 89. See also Small and Vincent, Introduction to the Study of Society, 89–92.

18. 18. B. Webb, My Apprenticeship, 126.

19. 19. Adams, introduction, v–vi.

20. 20. Adams, introduction, xi; Radest, Felix Adler, 14.

21. 21. Adams, introduction, ix.

22. 22. Addams, “The Objective Value of a Social Settlement.”

23. 23. These included Toynbee Hall and the People’s Palace in London, other settlements in England and the United States, and the schools and programs of the Society for Ethical Culture as well as numerous private philanthropies and religiously based social missions. See Carson, Settlement Folk. For the work of the Society for Ethical Culture, see Adler, “Modern Skepticism and Ethical Culture,” 386.

24. 24. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 1.

25. 25. Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings, 114.

26. 26. Commons, Social Reform and the Church, 29.

27. 27. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 2.

28. 28. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 2.

29. 29. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 4.

30. 30. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 2–7.

31. 31. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 4.

32. 32. Adams, introduction, xi.

33. 33. Harrison, Meaning of History, 174, 175–176. Kidd makes a similar statement, calling the French Revolution “the objective starting point of the modern world” (Social Evolution, 170).

34. 34. Except for brief discussions by Knight, biographers mention Mazzini and Toynbee but do not present the ideas that influenced Addams. See Knight, Citizen, 142–143, 211, 293–294. Hamington gives very brief summaries of a few of their insights (Social Philosophy of Jane Addams, 19–20, 25).

35. 35. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 13, 150.

36. 36. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 47. See also Knight, Citizen, 142–143.

37. 37. Mazzini, Duties of Man, 4–5.

38. 38. Addams, “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall,” 3.

39. 39. Toynbee, Lectures, 64–66, 95–100. Also see Toynbee, “Industry and Democracy,” 190–192.

40. 40. Toynbee, Lectures, 31; see also 27–31.

41. 41. Toynbee, “Industry and Democracy,” 198–199.

42. 42. Addams, “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall,” 2.

43. 43. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 3–4.

44. 44. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 6; Mazzini, “Young Europe,” 153.

45. 45. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 4, 2.

46. 46. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 2.

47. 47. Addams, “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall,” 3.

48. 48. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 2.

49. 49. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 10–11.

50. 50. Addams, Selected Papers, 2:533.

51. 51. Addams, Selected Papers, 2:170–171, 253n2.

52. 52. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:67–102. For his comment on Spencer, see 101–102.

53. 53. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 12.

54. 54. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 11; Spencer, Principles of Sociology, 2:640.

55. 55. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 11.

56. 56. Schuster, “Neurasthenia and a Modernizing America.”

57. 57. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 15.

58. 58. Addams, “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall,” 7.

59. 59. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 16.

60. 60. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:97.

61. 61. James, Principles of Psychology, vol. 2. See chapter 24 on instincts and chapter 25 on emotions. For the connection between instincts and emotion, see 442. The quotation is on 450.

62. 62. James, Principles of Psychology, 2:410–411, 411n.

63. 63. Fowler, Principles of Morals, 2:73–75, 73n3.

64. 64. Fowler, Principles of Morals, 2:80. George Crabb’s 1897 book English Synonymes defines sympathy as “fellow-feeling, that is, a kindred or like feeling, or feeling in company with another” (787). According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the word “empathy” was not used in English until the twentieth century.

65. 65. Fowler, Principles of Morals, 2:76.

66. 66. Addams, “College Woman and Christianity,” 1855.

67. 67. A JSTOR search (Aug. 16, 2016) for “motive power” between 1850 and 1920, yielded 1,711 results. Most uses designated physical energy sources. For example, an 1899 article in the Virginia Law Register about a railway company listed horses, cable, steam, and electricity as forms of motive power. See “Circuit Court of Norfolk County,” 482.

68. 68. McDougall writes, “The instincts are the prime movers of all human activity. . . . The instinctive impulses determine the ends of all activities and supply the driving power by which all mental activities are sustained; and all the complex intellectual apparatus of the most highly developed mind is but a means towards these ends, is but the instrument by which these impulses seek their satisfactions” (Introduction to Social Psychology, 44).

69. 69. McDougall, Introduction to Social Psychology, 44; James, Principles of Psychology, 2:393.

70. 70. Addams uses this expression in various forms in Twenty Years at Hull-House, 25; Newer Ideals of Peace, 119; “New Internationalism,” 215; and “Address on ‘What is the Greatest Menace,’” 340.

71. 71. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 2, 17.

72. 72. Knight, Citizen, 253; Brown, Education of Jane Addams, 264; Elshtain, Jane Addams and the Dream, 96.

73. 73. Schultz, “Jane Addams,” 207.

74. 74. Elshtain, Jane Addams and the Dream, 97.

75. 75. Knight, Citizen, 253–254.

76. 76. Schultz, “Jane Addams”; Knight, Citizen, 173–175.

77. 77. For positivism’s influence on English intellectuals, see T. Wright, Religion of Humanity, on Walter Pater (135–137), George Eliot (173–201), and Frederic Harrison (100–111).

78. 78. Pater, Marius the Epicurean, 2:130.

79. 79. Pater, Marius the Epicurean, 2:132, 140–142. Pater uses “minor peace” to distinguish the time of the Antonine emperors from the later “Peace of the Church” when Constantine declared Christianity the religion of the Roman Empire (2:132).

80. 80. Pater, Marius the Epicurean, 2:129. Addams writes, “The image of the Good Shepherd is blithe and gay beyond the gentlest shepherd of Greek mythology” (“Subjective Necessity,” 17). Addams does not attribute the words to Pater or insert quotation marks, a practice authors used with some frequency at the time.

81. 81. Pater, Marius the Epicurean, 2:136.

82. 82. Pater, Marius the Epicurean, 2:129–130. See T. Wright’s description of the novel, where “Pater interprets Christianity in a decidedly positive spirit. . . . The real centre of [Pater’s] attention is the Church . . . [where] worship takes Christ as a moving idealization of the notion of Humanity” (Religion of Humanity, 136).

83. 83. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 18–19.

84. 84. Addams, “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall,” 8; Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 21.

85. 85. Addams, “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall,” 8.

86. 86. Eliot, “O May I Join the Choir Invisible”; Gatens, “Art and Philosophy of George Eliot,” 73–78.

87. 87. Dixon, Invention of Altruism, 103–107.

88. 88. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 21.

89. 89. Harrison, Meaning of History, 85. For Harrison’s evolutionary view of history, see B. Young, “History,” 159–167; T. Wright, Religion of Humanity, 101–111.

90. 90. Linn, Jane Addams, 88–89.

91. 91. Harrison, “Positivism,” 459, 466.

92. 92. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 21. For contemporary commentary on this image, see, for example, Whipps, “Jane Addams’s Social Thought,” 125; Horowitz, “Varieties of Cultural Experience,” 73–74; Murdach, “Situational Approaches,” 212.

93. 93. Harrison, Meaning of History, 22. In Addams’s adaptation, the more cultivated voices can be distinguished, but their differences from the chorus are “lost in the unity of purpose” as they are all “lifted by a high motive.” This participation “exchange[s] for the music of isolated voices the volume and strength of the chorus” (Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 21).

94. 94. This may be an example of Addams synthesizing personal experience with scholarship. In 1885 Addams had written from Paris to her brother, Weber, about hearing soprano Christine Nilsson’s voice soar above the orchestra and chorus in a piece by French composer Charles Gounod (Addams to John Weber Addams, May 10, 1885).

95. 95. For discussions of Eliot’s and Harrison’s relation to Comtean positivism, see T. Wright, Religion of Humanity, 173–201, 100–111.

96. 96. Brown (Education of Jane Addams) and Knight (Citizen) track this transition throughout their biographies of Addams.

97. 97. See, for example, Addams, “Christmas Fellowship,” 308; Addams, “College Woman and Christianity,” 1852. R. A. R. Edwards in “Jane Addams, Walter Rauschenbusch, and Dorothy Day” argues that Addams used religious terms drained of theological content to talk about secular concerns.

98. 98. Adams, introduction, xi.

99. 99. Carson, Settlement Folk, 36–37; Radest, Toward Common Ground, 72–77. Henry Moscowitz was another who was deeply involved in both the settlement movement and the Society for Ethical Culture. See Radest, Toward Common Ground, 127–132.

100. 100. Addams mentions Salter’s offer of “unqualified support” in a letter to her sister, Mary Addams Linn (Addams to Linn, Apr. 1, 1889). For Addams’s active engagement with the Chicago Society for Ethical Culture, see Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago Records. The society sponsored monthly economic conferences at Hull House; see Radest, Toward Common Ground, 65. For Addams’s appearances at ethical culture society functions outside of Chicago, see Addams, “Social Test,” a talk given at the New York Society for Ethical Culture in March 1900, and Radest, Toward Common Ground, 165–167. Addams was on the faculty of the society’s Summer School of Ethics in Madison, WI, which held session from 1908 to 1911 (Radest, Toward Common Ground, 105–106).

101. 101. Kraut, From Reform Judaism to Ethical Culture, 45–46, 76–78, 125–126.

102. 102. Adler, “Freedom of Ethical Fellowship,” 16–17; Adler, “Modern Skepticism and Ethical Culture,” 381; Bois, “New Religions of America,” 254; National Leaders Council, “Ethical Culture as a Humanist Movement,” 96.

103. 103. Adler, “Modern Skepticism and Ethical Culture,” 380–381; National Leaders Council, “Ethical Culture as a Humanist Movement,” 93.

104. 104. Adler, “Modern Skepticism and Ethical Culture,” 384; Kraut, From Reform Judaism to Ethical Culture, 121.

105. 105. Adler, Creed And Deed, 35–36.

106. 106. B. Webb, My Apprenticeship, 145.

107. 107. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 26.

108. 108. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 23.

109. 109. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 22–23.

110. 110. Woods, “University Settlement Idea,” 69.

111. 111. Giddings, “Ethics of Social Progress,” 213.

Chapter Two

1. 1. Dubofsky and Dulles, Labor in America, 114–115, 125–148.

2. 2. Davis, Spearheads for Reform, 103–106; Nutter, “Mary Kenney O’Sullivan,” 651–652; A. Gordon, “Alzina Ann Parsons Stevens,” 843–844; “The Dorcas Federal Labor Union,” Hull-House Bulletin 1 (Apr. 1896): 3; “Laundry Employes’ Union,” Hull-House Bulletin 1 (Oct. 15, 1896): 3; “Chicago Working Women’s Council,” Hull-House Bulletin 1 (Apr. 1896): 3; Bosch, “Ellen Gates Starr,” 840.

3. 3. Knight, Citizen, 331–333.

4. 4. Sklar, Florence Kelley, 140–143, 151–156, 159–161, 171–172; Knight, Citizen, 229–230.

5. 5. Addams to Paul Kellogg, Nov. 23, 1905.

6. 6. Sklar, Florence Kelley, 216–223, 229–236.

7. 7. Schultz, introduction to Hull-House Maps and Papers, 1–5, 18–22.

8. 8. Kelley, “Sweating-System,” 63–72.

9. 9. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 138.

10. 10. See Carson, Settlement Folk, 101–102; Knight, Citizen, 344–347; Woods, “Neighborhood in Social Reconstruction.” The Charity Organization Society also considered forming neighborly relations as the basis of its work. See, for example, Richmond, Good Neighbor, 13–20.

11. 11. Addams, “Object of Social Settlements,” 149.

12. 12. Schneirov, “Knights of Labor,” 81–83.

13. 13. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 139.

14. 14. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 139–140.

15. 15. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 139.

16. 16. Lankester, Degeneration, 32.

17. 17. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 141.

18. 18. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 142. Contemporary scholars writing on the intersection of immigration and labor make the same point. See Barrett, “Americanization from the Bottom Up.”

19. 19. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 139, 143.

20. 20. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 140.

21. 21. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 144, 141.

22. 22. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 142, 149.

23. 23. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 145. See Mazzini, “Thoughts on Democracy in Europe,” 171.

24. 24. Mazzini, “Thoughts on Democracy in Europe,” 183–184, 177.

25. 25. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 149, Mazzini, “Thoughts on Democracy in Europe,” 175.

26. 26. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 145.

27. 27. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 145; Toynbee, “Industry and Democracy,” 194–200. Addams’s summary contains quoted phrases from Toynbee scattered throughout.

28. 28. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 149; Toynbee, “Industry and Democracy,” 201–202.

29. 29. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 144.

30. 30. Leaton gives a sketch of such a machine in “Self-Sustaining Motive Power,” 431.

31. 31. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 149.

32. 32. As discussed in the introduction, evolutionary scientists often held this view, including Herbert Spencer, Joseph Le Conte, and Benjamin Kidd.

33. 33. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 142. Addams may have been referring to some advocates of the cooperative movement, such as E. L. Godkin. See Rodgers, Work Ethic in Industrial America, 40–44.

34. 34. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 142–143. At that time in England, “Marxism” meant hard-line historical materialism. English socialists differentiated themselves from this view. See Collini, “Sociology and Idealism,” 41. As I will develop in the next chapter, Addams’s position had much in common with the British socialists. See Hale, Political Descent, 202–205.

35. 35. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 146.

36. 36. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 148.

37. 37. Addams’s original manuscripts on the Pullman strike were titled “A Modern Tragedy” and were written in 1895–1896. Addams revised them as “A Modern Lear,” which was published in 1912 in Survey.

38. 38. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 148; Kidd, Social Evolution, 165. He expresses the same thought on 170, 188, 238, 299.

39. 39. Kidd, Social Evolution, 299.

40. 40. Kidd, Social Evolution, 165.

41. 41. Crook, Benjamin Kidd, 1.

42. 42. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 114–115.

43. 43. See Hale, Political Descent, 3–6. For Hale’s discussion on Wallace, see 59–60; on Spencer, see 69–72; on the Fabian socialists, including Beatrice and Sidney Webb, see 204. For how Beatrice Webb took her understanding of altruism from Comte and Harrison, see B. Webb, My Apprenticeship, 144–146.

44. 44. Kidd, Social Evolution, 34–40, 45–57, 78–84.

45. 45. Morley, On Compromise, 161. In various writings, Addams refers to many passages from On Compromise and to this specific passage in Newer Ideals of Peace, 117.

46. 46. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 141–143.

47. 47. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 148.

48. 48. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 148.

49. 49. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 148.

50. 50. Peirce, “How to Make Our Ideas Clear,” 118–124.

51. 51. Butler, Victorian Doubt, 3; C. Lane, Age of Doubt, 154.

52. 52. For an analysis of In Memoriam and its significance, see Butler, Victorian Doubt, 1–2, 9–12.

53. 53. C. Lane, Age of Doubt, 1–13, 149; Butler, Victorian Doubt, 1–8.

54. 54. Daston and Galison, “The Image of Objectivity,” 82.

55. 55. Daston and Galison, “The Image of Objectivity,” 87–95.

56. 56. Daston and Galison, “The Image of Objectivity,” 98–109.

57. 57. Quoted in Daston and Galison, “The Image of Objectivity,” 122.

58. 58. Butler, Victorian Doubt, 66.

59. 59. See, for example, Addams to Sarah Alice Addams Haldeman, Jan. 19, 1881; Addams to Sarah Alice Addams Haldeman, Oct. 23, 1885. For quotations from Eliot in Addams’s college notebooks from Romola, see JAPM 27:163–164. For quotations from Middlemarch, see JAPM 27:358 and 27:373. For quotes from The Mill on the Floss, see JAPM 27:365.

60. 60. Eliot, Adam Bede, 175.

61. 61. Eliot, Selected Critical Writings, 263.

62. 62. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 146.

63. 63. Eliot, Mill on the Floss, 566–567.

64. 64. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 144.

65. 65. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 147.

66. 66. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 141, 142.

67. 67. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 147.

68. 68. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 147; Lowell, “Ode to France.”

69. 69. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 146. Addams makes a similar point in defending arbitration as superior to labor strikes as a method for settling labor disputes. See Addams, “Second Day, Morning Session,” 48.

70. 70. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 146–147. Eliot writes, “That is the path we all like when we set out on our abandonment of egoism—the path of martyrdom and endurance (where the palm-branches grow) rather than the steep highway of tolerance, just allowance, and self-blame (where there are no leafy honours to be gathered and worn)” (Mill on the Floss, 331–332).

71. 71. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 145–146. Toynbee writes, “Democracy, so giant-like and threatening, which, with rude strength, severs sacred ties and stamps out ancient landmarks” (“Democracy and Industry,” 195).

72. 72. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:67.

73. 73. Hale, Political Descent, 111–112.

74. 74. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:75.

75. 75. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:68–69.

76. 76. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:72–73. For excellent accounts of Darwin’s ethics, see Hale, Political Descent, chapter 3; Richards, Darwin and the Emergence, chapter 5.

77. 77. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:81–83.

78. 78. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:100.

79. 79. Richards, “Biology,” 31.

80. 80. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:170.

81. 81. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:162.

82. 82. Hale, Political Descent, 204.

83. 83. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:81.

84. 84. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:97.

85. 85. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 143.

86. 86. Toynbee credits Comte and particularly Frederic Harrison with anticipating evolutionary changes in capitalists’ moral nature. They predicted that capitalists would lose their greed for profits and become more willing to work cooperatively with workers (Toynbee, Lectures, 149–150).

87. 87. Darwin places organic evolution within geological time to explain how a slow process through minute variations could produce an enormous variety of species. See Origin of Species, 1st ed., 84, 95, 314, and chapters 9 and 10 on the geological record.

88. 88. For an overview of the affinities between science and literature as understood by nineteenth-century thinkers, see Dawson and Lightman’s general introduction to their eight-volume edited collection, Victorian Science and Literature. The volumes contain less well-known nineteenth-century documents that attest to the ways various authors conceived of the relation between science and literature. The editors note that many of these authors thought of science and literature as engaged in a common enterprise. Marsden gives an extensive list of recent scholarly works on this topic (introduction, 1–5).

89. 89. Budd, “American Background,” 29. At Rockford Female Seminary Addams was a member of the Science Association, which used Popular Science Monthly as a text for the club. Addams, Selected Papers, 1:252–253n1, 253n2.

90. 90. Beer, Darwin’s Plots, 4.

91. 91. See Wulf, Invention of Nature, 25–38, 169–171, 249–262; Dawson and Lightman, general introduction, xiii.

92. 92. Wulf, Invention of Nature, 226.

93. 93. Richards, Romantic Conception of Life, 518–521.

94. 94. Richards, Romantic Conception of Life, 524–525.

95. 95. Gatens, “Art and Philosophy of George Eliot,” 72.

96. 96. Lightman, introduction, 2; Newton, George Eliot, 5–10.

97. 97. Shuttleworth, George Eliot and Nineteenth-Century Science, ix.

98. 98. Adam Bede was published in February 1859, Origin of Species in November 1859.

99. 99. Shuttleworth, George Eliot and Nineteenth-Century Science, xii.

100. 100. Quoted in Gatens, “Art and Philosophy of George Eliot,” 80; Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 22.

101. 101. Beer, Darwin’s Plots, xxiv. See also chapter 3, “Analogy, Metaphor and Narrative in The Origin,” 73–96. In Darwin’s Metaphor, R. Young emphasizes Darwin’s use of anthropomorphic terms to describe natural selection and the struggle for existence. See chapter 4, “Darwin’s Metaphor: Does Nature Select?,” especially 92–96, 102–103.

102. 102. Darwin, Origin of Species, 1st ed., refers to the “tree of life” (130) and “hidden bond” (426).

103. 103. Darwin, Origin of Species, 1st ed., 434; Beer, Darwin’s Plots, 156.

104. 104. Darwin, Origin of Species, 1st ed., 489.

105. 105. Dawson, “Science and Its Popularization,” 173; Beer, Darwin’s Plots, 154–156.

106. 106. Darwin, Origin of Species, 1st ed., 73.

107. 107. Eliot, review of Modern Painters, 343. In their general introduction to Victorian Science and Literature, Dawson and Lightman make this point more generally, noting that “realist novelists. . . . presented human existence as it was in nineteenth-century Britain and they did so in ways that paralleled the scientists’ approach to understanding the natural world” (xiv).

108. 108. Eliot, Adam Bede, 193–197. Eliot’s remarks are in an interlude from the story in a chapter titled “In Which the Story Pauses a Little.”

109. 109. Darwin, Origin of Species, 1st ed., 60–61.

110. 110. Darwin, Origin of Species, 1st ed., 62.

111. 111. Eliot, Adam Bede, 193.

112. 112. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 31.

113. 113. The literature on imagination and the Romantic poets is vast. The classic study is Abrams, Mirror and the Lamp. See 167–177 for discussion of Coleridge on imagination.

114. 114. Gatens, “Art and Philosophy of George Eliot,” 80.

115. 115. Pyle, “Novel Sympathy,” 14–16.

116. 116. See Shuttleworth, George Eliot and Nineteenth-Century Science, chapter 3; Pyle, “Novel Sympathy.”

117. 117. Beer, Darwin’s Plots, 6.

118. 118. Darwin repeats these points often. See for example, Origin of Species, 1st ed., 6, 73, 78, 131, 167. The final chapter, “Recapitulation and Conclusion,” brings them together succinctly.

119. 119. Darwin, Origin of Species, 1st ed., 84, 51.

120. 120. Darwin, Origin of Species, 1st ed., 490.

121. 121. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 146; Darwin, Origin of Species, 1st ed., 48, 52.

122. 122. See Pappas, John Dewey’s Ethics, 84–87.

123. 123. Pappas, John Dewey’s Ethics, chapter 2.

124. 124. Pappas, John Dewey’s Ethics, 75–78.

125. 125. Addams included her eulogy of Gordon Dewey in Addams, Excellent Becomes the Permanent, 61–69. For Dewey’s association with Hull House and friendship with Addams, see Knight, Citizen, 238–240.

126. 126. See Westbrook, John Dewey, 42–45, 62–63.

127. 127. Westbrook, John Dewey, 152–166.

Chapter Three

1. 1. Graham Wallas to Addams, May 14, 1915.

2. 2. In Comte’s four-volume System of Positive Polity, volume 2 is subtitled Social Statics, or the Abstract Theory of Human Order. Volume 3 is subtitled Social Dynamics, or the General Theory of Human Progress.

3. 3. See Ward, “Static and Dynamic Sociology”; Small, “Static and Dynamic Sociology.”

4. 4. Le Conte, “Theory of Evolution and Social Progress,” 481–482.

5. 5. Harrison, Meaning of History, 18; S. Webb, “Historic,” 32–33.

6. 6. B. Webb, My Apprenticeship, 237–238.

7. 7. Toynbee, “Notes and Jottings,” 250–251; Mazzini, Duties of Man, 86–87.

8. 8. Kirkup, History of Socialism, 25, 230; S. Webb, Socialism in England, 95.

9. 9. See, for example, Kirkup, History of Socialism, 280–281; S. Webb, “Historic,” 35; S. Webb, Socialism in England, xvi, xxi, 132–133.

10. 10. Addams, “Domestic Service,” 629.

11. 11. Vapnek, Breadwinners, 4, 106–108.

12. 12. Vapnek, Breadwinners, 104.

13. 13. Vapnek, Breadwinners, chapter 4.

14. 14. Vapnek, Breadwinners, chapter 4; Addams, “Program of Lectures.”

15. 15. Eaton, Gilman, and Hunt are listed as Hull House residents in McCree, Slote, and De Angury, Jane Addams Papers, 146–147. For Kellor as a Hull House resident, see Fitzpatrick, Endless Crusade, 80.

16. 16. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 538. For background on Count von Rumford and his inventions, see Encyclopedia Britannica Online, s.v. “Sir Benjamin Thompson, Count von Rumford,” http://www.britannica.com/biography/Sir-Benjamin-Thompson-Graf-von-Rumford, accessed Jan. 25, 2016.

17. 17. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 536.

18. 18. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 541–543.

19. 19. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 543–546.

20. 20. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 546–547.

21. 21. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 540, 536.

22. 22. Addams, “Domestic Service,” 630; Addams, “Belated Industry,” 544.

23. 23. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 548.

24. 24. Morris, Dream of John Ball, 29.

25. 25. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 545.

26. 26. Addams uses slight variations of this expression a number of times in the essay (“Belated Industry,” 540, 548, 550).

27. 27. I base these comments on a JSTOR database search (Aug. 20, 2016) for “trend of the times” between 1880 and 1920. For example, Henry C. Devine, responding to cooperative banks’ lack of success in England, writes, “It is generally agreed by students of sociology that the most significant trend of the times is that in the direction of association and organisation.” He goes on to describe other successful efforts at cooperation (“People’s Cooperative Banks,” 132).

28. 28. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 540.

29. 29. Addams, “Woman and the State,” 20–23.

30. 30. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 539–540.

31. 31. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 536.

32. 32. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 537, 550.

33. 33. Addams, “Belated Industry,” 548, 550.

34. 34. Ward, “Static and Dynamic Sociology,” 212.

35. 35. Chandler, Dream of Order. See particularly chapters 1, 4, and 6.

36. 36. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 2. Cartelli notes that Addams’s statement seems to be based on Edgar’s line in King Lear, “Men must endure their going hence, even as their coming hither” (Repositioning Shakespeare, 48–49).

37. 37. Leyendecker, Palace Car Prince, 177; “Section of Public Medicine,” 409.

38. 38. Pacyga, Chicago, 143–144.

39. 39. Knight, Citizen, 297–325; Brown, “Advocate for Democracy,” 130–158; Schneirov, Stromquist, and Salvatore, introduction.

40. 40. Knight, Citizen, 360–362.

41. 41. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 1, 2. The Jane Addams Papers (Microfilm) has two versions of “A Modern Tragedy,” at 46:647 and 46:722. I will draw on both versions, although primarily on the second, which is longer and more complex.

42. 42. Albert Shaw to Addams, Jan. 18, 1896; A. E. Keet to Addams, Feb. 1, 1896; Addams, “Program of Lectures.”

43. 43. Scudder to Mary Hawes Wilmarth, Apr. 18, 1896.

44. 44. Cartelli, Repositioning Shakespeare, 53.

45. 45. Cartelli, Repositioning Shakespeare, 53–62.

46. 46. Bevir, Making of British Socialism, 132–135, 240–246; Linehan, Modernism and British Socialism, 1.

47. 47. Bevir, Making of British Socialism, 134–135, 176–177, 187–188. For Beatrice Webb’s account of Comte’s influence on her thinking, see My Apprenticeship, 141–147.

48. 48. Pease, preface, vi–vii. Pease was secretary of the Fabian Society.

49. 49. The wording of the two quotations is from Sidney Webb (Socialism in England, 3; English Progress, 9). Kirkup made equivalent statements (History of Socialism, 8, 230).

50. 50. S. Webb, “Historic”; Kirkup, History of Socialism, 100, 230–247.

51. 51. Kirkup, History of Socialism, 227.

52. 52. S. Webb, “Historic,” 56–57.

53. 53. S. Webb, “Historic,” 31.

54. 54. S. Webb, “Historic,” 31; Kirkup, History of Socialism, chapters 2–4.

55. 55. Collini, “Sociology and Idealism,” 41–43. This held true until the beginning of World War I. Associations of British Marxists included the Social Democratic Federation and the Socialist League. See Bevir’s helpful discussion in The Making of British Socialism, 9–16.

56. 56. Kirkup, History of Socialism, 285–286; S. Webb, English Progress, 15.

57. 57. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 96.

58. 58. Addams, “Program of Lectures.”

59. 59. Sidney Webb to Addams, June 13, 1896. Addams to Samuel M. Jones, May 28, 1898.

60. 60. Quoted in Davis, American Heroine, 96.

61. 61. Coleridge, Essays and Lectures on Shakespeare, 125; Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 12.

62. 62. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 3.

63. 63. In her discussion of Addams’s analysis of the Pullman strike, Rieff gives a gender critique of Pullman as paternalistic, but she does not link paternalism with the structure of feudalism (“Modern Lear”).

64. 64. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 5.

65. 65. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 5.

66. 66. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 2, 3.

67. 67. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 4.

68. 68. S. Webb, “Historic,” 40.

69. 69. S. Webb, Socialism in England, 95.

70. 70. Geddes, “On the Conditions of Progress,” 88. For Geddes’s disagreements with the Fabians, see Meller, Patrick Geddes, 66, 67, 143.

71. 71. Kirkup, History of Socialism, 5.

72. 72. Kirkup, History of Socialism, 5–6.

73. 73. Kirkup, History of Socialism, 14; Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 4.

74. 74. Kirkup, History of Socialism, 230–231.

75. 75. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 2.

76. 76. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 6.

77. 77. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:647), 7, 1.

78. 78. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:647), 11. “Hytrophied,” a term infrequently used in medicine, was equivalent to “hypertrophy.” See Wilder, “Cystitis,” 110. Beeton’s Medical Dictionary defines hypertrophy as “a morbid increase of any organ, without change in the nature of its substance, arising from an excessive nutrition” (197).

79. 79. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 6.

80. 80. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:647), 10.

81. 81. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 6, 10, 13.

82. 82. S. Webb, English Progress, 14, 3.

83. 83. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 14. The quotation is from Mazzini, Duties of Man, and reads, “God has given you both the consent of your fellow-men, and your own conscience, even as two wings, wherewith to elevate yourselves towards Him” (55).

84. 84. S. Webb, “Historic,” 49–50.

85. 85. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 7.

86. 86. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 8–10.

87. 87. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 7, 12.

88. 88. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 13–14.

89. 89. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 13.

90. 90. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 13; Kirkup, History of Socialism, 12.

91. 91. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 15; S. Webb, Socialism in England, 7, 9. Webb uses the terms “vertical” and “horizontal” oddly, but the idea he expresses matches Addams’s.

92. 92. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 15.

93. 93. Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 15.

94. 94. Dewey to Alice Chipman Dewey, Oct. 10, 1894.

95. 95. Dewey to Addams, Oct. 12, 1894.

96. 96. Dewey to Alice Chipman Dewey and children, Aug. 31, 1894.

97. 97. Dewey to Addams, Jan. 19, 1896.

98. 98. Westbrook, John Dewey, 88–89.

99. 99. Menand, Metaphysical Club, 314.

100. 100. Westbrook, Democratic Hope, 93.

101. 101. Knight also gives a careful examination of this conversation with Addams that Dewey conveyed to Alice Dewey. Knight reads Addams as a Christian idealist and interprets Addams’s responses as coming from a commitment to “Tolstoyan and Christian nonviolence” (Citizen, 322–325).

102. 102. Addams, “Second Day, Morning Session,” 48.

103. 103. Miller, City of the Century, 547.

104. 104. Knight, Citizen, 292–296; Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 110–111; Hamington, Social Philosophy of Jane Addams, 127–148.

105. 105. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 110–111.

106. 106. Lloyd to George Gates, May 23, 1895, quoted in Jernigan, Henry Demarest Lloyd, 88–89.

107. 107. Ely, “Recent American Socialism,” 65–74.

108. 108. For example, Lear and Cordelia, like the parents and their adult daughter, experience “the entanglement of wounded affections” (Addams, “Modern Lear” [JAPM 46:722], 5; Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 4). Both Cordelia and the daughter imagine themselves to be “a citizen of the world,” and both envision “the larger life . . . the life of the race which surrounds and completes the individual and family life” (Addams, “Modern Tragedy” [JAPM 46:722], 7; Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 4).

109. 109. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 3.

110. 110. For Addams’s struggles in regard to gender roles with her father and stepmother, including her stepmother’s opposition to Addams’s work at Hull House, see Knight, Citizen, 59–65, 109–111, 146–149, 166, 176. For Addams’s use of negotiating and rhetorical skills in finding ways around gender expectations in college, see Brown, Education of Jane Addams, 66–69, 95–96.

111. 111. Snyder, 120 Years, 64; Lynn D. Gordon, “Education and the Professions,” 228–231.

112. 112. Snyder, 120 Years, 64; 1869–1870 was the first year that the federal government’s Office of Education collected data.

113. 113. Hamlin, From Eve to Evolution, 73–80.

114. 114. Lynn D. Gordon, “Education and the Professions,” 228–233.

115. 115. Delegard, “Women’s Movements,” 328.

116. 116. Schultz, introduction to Women Building Chicago, xxvi–xxxi. See also Sklar’s succinct discussion of the Chicago Woman’s Club, with whose members Addams worked closely (Florence Kelley, 177). Addams published a piece at about the same time that goes into great detail on the wide-ranging social reform activities carried out by Chicago’s women. See “Woman’s Work for Chicago.”

117. 117. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 3–4.

118. 118. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 4–5.

119. 119. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 4; Addams, “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 7.

120. 120. Mazzini, Duties of Man, 86, 66.

121. 121. Mazzini, Duties of Man, 102, 96.

122. 122. Addams quotes from The Mill on the Floss in “Settlement as a Factor,” 146 (Eliot, 567) and 147 (Eliot, 331–332). She uses Maggie’s phrase, that “pity, memory, and faithfulness are natural ties,” in her discussion of Cordelia in “A Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:722), 12–13 (Eliot, 511) and in her revised version of “College Woman” in the chapter titled “Filial Relations” in Democracy and Social Ethics (46).

123. 123. Addams, “Subjective Necessity,” 14.

124. 124. Eliot, Mill on the Floss, 374, 543, 574.

125. 125. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 4.

126. 126. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 7.

127. 127. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 4.

128. 128. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 5.

129. 129. St. Francis and his father appeared in the earlier version of “Modern Tragedy” (JAPM 46:647), 6.

130. 130. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 6. In “A Survey of the Thirteenth Century,” a chapter in The Meaning of History, Harrison describes the time “when the spiritual Crusades of Francis and Dominic begin, and the contagious zeal of the mendicant Friars restored the force of the Church, and gave it a new era of moral and social vitality” (141; see also 160–161). Addams owned the book in her personal library and drew from it on occasion (“Books Which Have Survived from Jane Addams’ Personal Library at Hull-House”). Historian Brian Young describes Harrison’s history as “consistently and resolutely Comtist,” giving further evidence of the influence of positivism on Addams (“History,” 159).

131. 131. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 6, 7.

132. 132. Addams, “College Woman and Christianity,” 1852. The quotation is taken from Morley, On Compromise, 98. Kirkup also gives an evolutionary version of Mazzini’s image of concentric circles (History of Socialism, 247).

133. 133. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 7.

134. 134. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 7.

135. 135. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 7.

136. 136. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 146.

137. 137. Jacobson, Whiteness of a Different Color, chapter 2, “Anglo-Saxons and Others: 1840–1924.”

138. 138. Daniels, Coming to America, 213. For discussions of labor and immigrants from specific countries, see chapters in part II, “The Century of Immigration.”

139. 139. Addams, Newer Ideals of Peace, 48–49.

140. 140. Eliot, Mill on the Floss, 566.

141. 141. For classic discussions of how pragmatists use theories as tools, see Peirce, “Fixation of Belief”; James, Pragmatism, chapter 2, “What Pragmatism Means”; Dewey, Logic, 105–122. For a discussion of Dewey’s understanding of ethical principles as tools, see Pappas, John Dewey’s Ethics, 43–51, 65–68.

Chapter Four

1. 1. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, s.v. “Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt” (by Alan Kim), https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wilhelm-wundt/ (accessed Nov. 15, 2016); Klautke, Mind of the Nation, 1–7, 58–103; Diriwächter, “Völkerpsychologie,” 49–54.

2. 2. Merriner, Grafters and Goo Goos, 80.

3. 3. Roberts, “Portrait of a Robber Baron,” 346–352.

4. 4. Baker, “Hull House and the Ward Boss,” 769, 771.

5. 5. Addams to Henry Demarest Lloyd, Dec. 22, 1895.

6. 6. Davis, Spearheads for Reform, 155.

7. 7. Davis, Spearheads for Reform, 159.

8. 8. Nelli, “John Powers and the Italians,” 68. Powers spent one year (1904–1905) in the Illinois State Senate but then returned to the Chicago City Council (Nelli, “John Powers and the Italians,” 75).

9. 9. Kelley, “Hull House,” 566; Sklar, Florence Kelley, 300–303.

10. 10. “Powers on the Griddle”; “Miss Jane Addams of Hull House”; “Powers in a Focus.” The manuscript of the speech is titled “Ethical Survivals in City Immorality.”

11. 11. Richard T. Ely to Addams, Feb. 23, 1898.

12. 12. Davis, American Heroine, 123–124.

13. 13. Sklar, Florence Kelley, 302; Davis, American Heroine, 123; Miller, City of the Century, 464.

14. 14. Davis, Spearheads for Reform, 157.

15. 15. Geddes and Thomson, Sex, 214; Addams, Long Road of Woman’s Memory, 34. Sidney Webb makes a similar observation, writing, “We learn to class men and ideas in a kind of geological order in time” (“Historic,” 32–33).

16. 16. Tylor, Primitive Culture, 16–17.

17. 17. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in City Immorality,” 11; Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 274, 276, 277, 282.

18. 18. Addams, “Object of Social Settlements,” 148–149; Jacobson, Whiteness of a Different Color, chapter 2, “Anglo-Saxons and Others: 1840–1924.”

19. 19. Baker, “Hull House and the Ward Boss,” 770.

20. 20. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 274; Wundt, Ethics, 1:32.

21. 21. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 273–274; Wundt, Ethics, 1:131–133, 155.

22. 22. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 274; Wundt, Ethics, 1:32, 80. In an unmarked quotation from Wundt, Addams writes, “The personal example promptly rouses to emulation” (“Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 274; Wundt, Ethics, 1:80).

23. 23. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 286–287. With the speech transcript Addams includes a map of Con Row that identifies residents of the street, most of whom held offices in city government (“Ethical Survivals in City Immorality,” 19–20).

24. 24. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 275. The first phrase is a quote from Wundt, Ethics, 1:162; the second summarizes Wundt, Ethics, 1:134–139.

25. 25. Nelli, “John Powers and the Italians,” 75–76.

26. 26. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 275–276.

27. 27. Merwin, “Irish in American Life,” 289. Here Merwin is conveying commonly held stereotypes of the Irish. See also Jacobson, Whiteness of a Different Color, 48–52; Takaki, Different Mirror, chapter 6.

28. 28. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 290.

29. 29. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 282.

30. 30. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 276–283.

31. 31. Anonymous to Addams, Jan. 17, 1898.

32. 32. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 281; Wundt, Ethics, 1:140–143.

33. 33. Wundt, Ethics, 1:142; Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 281.

34. 34. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 281.

35. 35. Darwin, Descent of Man, 1:99; Wundt, Ethics, 1:245.

36. 36. Spencer, Principles of Psychology, 2:586, 587. See the full discussion (2:565–588).

37. 37. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 286.

38. 38. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 274; Wundt, Ethics, 1:168.

39. 39. See Nelli, “Italian Padrone System.”

40. 40. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 278–279.

41. 41. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 287.

42. 42. Wundt, Ethics, 1:152–162. The quotation is on 162.

43. 43. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 274.

44. 44. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 279, 274.

45. 45. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 148.

46. 46. Miller, City of the Century, 446–448; Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 283. Wundt discusses drinking rituals among primitive peoples and how hospitality was a central virtue for them (Ethics, 1:144–145, 286–290).

47. 47. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 290, 282; Addams, “Ethical Survivals in City Immorality,” 11.

48. 48. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 291.

49. 49. Charles Yerkes, the source of Powers’s “boodle,” made large donations to the University of Chicago (Daniel Levine, Jane Addams and the Liberal Tradition, 78); Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 288; Roberts, “Portrait of a Robber Baron,” 347.

50. 50. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 53–54.

51. 51. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 288–289.

52. 52. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 290; Wundt, Ethics, 1:280. Addams’s quotation is not exact.

53. 53. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 149.

54. 54. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 273.

55. 55. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 290; Addams, “College Woman and Christianity,” 1853.

56. 56. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 291.

57. 57. William Salter to Addams, Jan. 23, 1898.

58. 58. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 284.

59. 59. Agnew, From Charity to Social Work, 5, 63–64; Davis, Spearheads for Reform, 18–22. See also Beatrice Webb’s engaging account in My Apprenticeship, 188–208.

60. 60. Agnew, From Charity to Social Work, 84–89; Davis, Spearheads for Reform, 18–22.

61. 61. Knight, Citizen, 226–227.

62. 62. Davis, Spearheads for Reform, 21–22.

63. 63. Addams, “Program of Lectures.” These include Warner, American Charities, and “Politics and Crime”; Richmond, Friendly Visiting among the Poor. See also Agnew, From Charity to Social Work, 63–64.

64. 64. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 164.

65. 65. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 164, 170.

66. 66. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 169.

67. 67. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 163, 167.

68. 68. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 176, 173.

69. 69. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 164.

70. 70. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 164–168.

71. 71. Rodgers, Work Ethic in Industrial America, xi–xiv, 1–35.

72. 72. George Crabb’s English Synonymes describes perplexity this way: “That perplexity and confusion into which the mind is thrown by unexpected or inexplicable events, is termed a maze; because, for the time, it is bereft of its power to pursue its ordinary functions of recollection and combination” (575). The term is contrasted to “disengage” because one is more entangled in a perplexity, and it is more difficult to extricate oneself (341–342). For a feminist pragmatist reading of Addams’s use of “perplexity,” see Seigfried, introduction to the Illinois Edition of Democracy and Social Ethics, xxii–xxxi.

73. 73. Harold, Farming and Railroad Interests, 32; Phelps, “Women’s Views of Divorce,” 131; Creelman, “Problem of Well-Being and Suffering,” 327, 329, 333.

74. 74. Dewey, Logic, 109.

75. 75. Giddings, “Economic Ages,” 199, 203–204.

76. 76. Giddings, “Economic Ages,” 204.

77. 77. Stout, “Genesis of the Cognition,” 26–27, 29–30.

78. 78. Morley, Recollections, 1:100.

79. 79. For discussions of doubt in the Victorian era, see Houghton, Victorian Frame of Mind; Wilson, God’s Funeral. Wilson takes his title from Thomas Hardy’s poem, which gives a particularly poignant presentation of how late Victorians experienced doubt (God’s Funeral, 307–309).

80. 80. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 165.

81. 81. For these and other examples, see Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 164–167.

82. 82. Addams tucks in words from Darwin, writing, “The evolutionists tell us that the instinct to pity, the impulse to aid his fellows, served man at a very early period as a rude rule of right and wrong” (“Subtle Problems of Charity,” 165). This phrase, “rude rule of right and wrong,” is a direct quote from Darwin’s Descent of Man, 1:99.

83. 83. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 168–169; Wundt, Ethics, 1:182–187.

84. 84. This is an annotation Addams added to her copy of the printed article. See “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 165 (JAPM 46:916).

85. 85. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 283.

86. 86. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 173; Wundt, Ethics, 1:208–214.

87. 87. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 166–167.

88. 88. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 178.

89. 89. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 176.

90. 90. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 177.

91. 91. Le Conte, “Scientific Relation,” 426–427. This pattern was very close to the order Auguste Comte proposed in his hierarchy of the sciences (Positive Philosophy, 1:18–33).

92. 92. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 176.

93. 93. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 166.

94. 94. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 163.

95. 95. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 178.

96. 96. Micah 6:8, KJV.

97. 97. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 178.

98. 98. Addams, “Arts and Crafts and the Settlement,” 2.

99. 99. Walker, “Restriction of Immigration”; Royce, “Some Characteristic Tendencies,” 224–227, 241–242; Royce, “Provincialism,” 74–77; Takaki, Different Mirror, 187–191.

100. 100. Addams, “Program of Lectures.”

101. 101. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 24; Knight, Citizen, 357, 367–371.

102. 102. Caird, Evolution of Religion, 1:21–25.

103. 103. Caird, Evolution of Religion, 1:ix.

104. 104. Caird, Evolution of Religion, 1:15–20.

105. 105. Caird, Evolution of Religion, 1:51.

106. 106. Caird, Evolution of Religion, 1:19–20.

107. 107. Caird, Evolution of Religion, 1:25–27.

108. 108. Addams, “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption,” 289.

109. 109. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 178.

110. 110. Lindley, “‘Neglected Voices’ and ‘Praxis,’” 76–79.

111. 111. Addams, “Program of Lectures”; Addams to Scudder, Jan. 21, 1899.

112. 112. Sullivan, Revealing Whiteness, 172–176; M. Marshall, Contesting Cultural Rhetorics, 185n8. See Hamington’s extensive discussion of Addams on race (Social Philosophy of Jane Addams, 119–125).

113. 113. For accounts of Descartes and the scholastics, see Ariew, Descartes and the Last Scholastics; Menn, Descartes and Augustine.

114. 114. Newton studied alchemy intensively over a thirty-year period, writing more than a million words on the subject. See W. Newman, “Background to Newton’s Chymistry,” 358; Figala, “Newton’s Alchemy,” 370.

115. 115. Bourne, “Trans-National America,” published in 1916; Kallen, “Democracy versus the Melting-Pot,” published in 1915.

Chapter Five

1. 1. The anthology Jane Addams in the Classroom, edited by David Schaafsma, contains a number of thoughtful essays that explore Addams’s approach to education.

2. 2. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 104.

3. 3. See, for example, J. Q. Emery, state superintendent of public instruction for Wisconsin, who lavishly extolled his state’s educational achievements at the university, normal school, high school, and common school levels, and in providing for students with disabilities (“Address of Welcome,” 39–41).

4. 4. This was a frequent theme in the other plenary presentations. Reverend Lyman Abbott closed the plenary sessions with “The Democracy of Learning,” in which he elaborated at length on how education was the foundation of self-government (190).

5. 5. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 112.

6. 6. Sanders, Education of an Urban Minority, 67–69. Disagreements over schools was just one of the many ways that national differences played out among Irish and Italian Catholic immigrants. See Vecoli’s extensive discussion in “Prelates and Peasants.”

7. 7. Guglielmo, White on Arrival, 15–16; Daniels, Coming to America, 195.

8. 8. Cubberley, Changing Conceptions of Education, 15.

9. 9. For popular images of southern Italians in Chicago, see Guglielmo, White on Arrival, 14–26; Ross’s remarks are in The Old World in the New, 97–101. Ross attributes the inset quoted phrase to Henry James.

10. 10. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 105.

11. 11. These statements are representative. Albert G. Lane, superintendent of schools in Chicago, stressed that every resolution adopted at the convention should be tested “on the basis of its fitness and adaptation to harmonious mental growth, to the development of true character, and to the cultivation of those social interests which will make American patriots” (“Address of Welcome,” 50). In his presidential address, Charles R. Skinner, state superintendent of public instruction in New York, stated that “it is the highest province of the state to determine the character and the quality of the education which will best prepare [the masses] for their life work as individuals and as citizens of the Republic” (“Best Education for the Masses,” 53).

12. 12. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 105–106.

13. 13. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 105–106.

14. 14. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 105, 110.

15. 15. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 107.

16. 16. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 105, 108, 109.

17. 17. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 110.

18. 18. Herrick, Chicago Schools, 62–67.

19. 19. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 108.

20. 20. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 108. On the belief in southern Italians’ innate criminality, see Guglielmo, White on Arrival, 77–79.

21. 21. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 108.

22. 22. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 109–111.

23. 23. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 107, 110.

24. 24. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 111.

25. 25. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 111–112.

26. 26. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 108. In the session of the Department of Manual Industrial Education, its president, Oscar Clute, president of Florida Agricultural and Mechanical College, gave an address extolling the wide range of virtues acquired through manual training, including accuracy, concentration and focus, patience, and good judgment (“Head and the Hand,” 737–742). Other speakers had similar themes.

27. 27. For an 1895 account of the history of the Child Study movement, see Wiltse, “Preliminary Sketch.” For background, see Cremin, Transformation of the School, 101–105. Among the plenary speakers, Ellen M. Henrotin, president of the General Federation of Woman’s Clubs, and James A. Foshay, superintendent of the Los Angeles Schools, discussed the Child Study movement (Henrotin, “Cooperation of Woman’s Clubs,” 79; Foshay, “Some Tendencies,” 160). It was also discussed in many of the departments’ sessions.

28. 28. Peterson, Politics of School Reform, 16–17, 65–71.

29. 29. The Hull-House Bulletin of April, 1, 1897, lists a “Mechanical and Educational Club” (10); the Hull-House Bulletin of October 1, 1897, lists a number of manual training classes that would resume after the summer break (3). As the Labor Museum developed, the manual training offerings became more extensive (Hull-House Bulletin 4 [Midwinter 1900], 3).

30. 30. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 112.

31. 31. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 106–107.

32. 32. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 108–109.

33. 33. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 108–109.

34. 34. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 109.

35. 35. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 112.

36. 36. Cartelli makes this error. He criticizes Addams’s example in Twenty Years at Hull-House of a seamstress occupying her mind with Shakespearean characters as Addams’s “offering imaginary resolutions to the immediate problems of labor” (Repositioning Shakespeare, 59–60).

37. 37. See Addams, “Address [on Industrial Education].”

38. 38. Schuyler, “Italian Immigration,” 485–487; Guglielmo, White on Arrival, 22. See also Daniels, Coming to America, 190.

39. 39. Lawrence Cremin notes the “patent similarity” between Addams’s and Dewey’s views on education and attributes it to their association in Chicago during the decade Dewey spent there (Transformation of the School, 63n7). In “‘Learn to Earn’: A Pragmatist Response to Contemporary Dialogues about Industrial Education,” Judy D. Whipps makes an extensive comparison of the Laboratory School and the Labor Museum and identifies points of overlap in Dewey’s and Addams’s philosophies of education.

40. 40. Dewey and Addams both recount how this model was developed for and primarily served the elite class from medieval times to the present. Dewey, School and Society, 16–18; Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 49–50.

41. 41. Dewey, “School as Social Centre,” 91.

42. 42. Dewey, School and Society, 53–54.

43. 43. Addams, “Humanizing Tendency of Industrial Education.”

44. 44. For how personnel of the Laboratory School and Hull House interacted regularly, see Durst, Women Educators in the Progressive Era, 101–109. For an account that documents in detail how those involved in the school collaborated, see Mayhew and Edwards, Dewey School. Seigfried also discusses collaboration among the teachers of the Laboratory School (Pragmatism and Feminism, 196–199).

45. 45. For Mary Hill, see Durst, Women Educators, 6, 26, 106. Gerald Swope was involved in the Labor Museum and later became president of General Electric (Durst, Women Educators, 40).

46. 46. See, for example, Chinn, “‘To Reveal the Humble Immigrant Parents’.”

47. 47. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 138–144.

48. 48. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 47. The Laboratory School opened in January 1896 (Mayhew and Edwards, Dewey School, 7–8).

49. 49. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 48; the inset quote is from Geddes, “Edinburgh Outlook Tower,” 946.

50. 50. Geddes gave his talk on March 31, 1899 (Hull-House Bulletin 3 [Apr.–May 1899]: 5).

51. 51. Addams to Lillian D. Wald, Apr. 7, 1899.

52. 52. Meller, Patrick Geddes, 114.

53. 53. For the attempted visit in India, see Addams to Patrick Geddes, Feb. 20, 1923. For Geddes at the University of Bombay, see Scott, Envisioning Sociology, 103.

54. 54. Meller, Patrick Geddes, 27, 31–45.

55. 55. Renwick, British Sociology’s Lost Biological Roots, 89–90, 95. For an overview of Geddes’s theorizing, see Scott, “Social Theory of Patrick Geddes.”

56. 56. Geddes, “Civics I,” 107, 110.

57. 57. Geddes, “Civics I,” part I, 104.

58. 58. Geddes, “Civics II,” 58–60.

59. 59. Meller, Patrick Geddes, 75–79; Renwick, British Sociology’s Lost Biological Roots, 90–93.

60. 60. Geddes, “Edinburgh Outlook Tower,” 946.

61. 61. Meller, Patrick Geddes, 93–96; Zueblin, “World’s First Sociological Laboratory,” 581. Meller notes that at the time “the relevant disciplines of geography and geology, economic history, the natural and social sciences were either non-existent or barely established in academic form in any institution in Britain” (Patrick Geddes, 92–93).

62. 62. Meller, Patrick Geddes, 96.

63. 63. See http://www.camera-obscura.co.uk; accessed June 24, 2016.

64. 64. Geddes, “Edinburgh Outlook Tower,” 945–997; Zueblin, “World’s First Sociological Laboratory,” 584–591.

65. 65. Zueblin, “World’s First Sociological Laboratory,” 592.

66. 66. Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:966), 5.

67. 67. Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:966), 4, 9; Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 105.

68. 68. Linn, Jane Addams, 182.

69. 69. Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:966), 1–2.

70. 70. Addams objected to calling Hull House a sociological laboratory in spite of the fact that high-level sociological research was carried out under its auspices. “Settlements should be something much more human and spontaneous than such a phrase connotes,” she commented (Twenty Years at Hull-House, 178).

71. 71. Sturtevant, “Does Anthropology Need Museums?,” 622–625.

72. 72. Conn, Museums and American Intellectual Life, 15–16.

73. 73. Conn, Museums and American Intellectual Life, 5.

74. 74. Luther, “Labor Museum at Hull House,” 2.

75. 75. Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:966), 7.

76. 76. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 108–109.

77. 77. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 47.

78. 78. Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:966), 5, 6.

79. 79. Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:977), 1.

80. 80. Bosch, “Ellen Gates Starr,” 840; Washburne, “Labor Museum,” 77–80.

81. 81. Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:977), 24.

82. 82. Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:966), 4.

83. 83. Addams, “First Report,” 3.

84. 84. Addams, “First Report,” 5–11.

85. 85. Conn, Museums and American Intellectual Life, 5. Historian George Stocking writes that anthropology museums generally displayed objects of material culture that belong to those considered “other” who were distinctively different from Anglo-Saxons in problematic ways (“Essays on Museums and Material Culture,” 3).

86. 86. Hinsley, “World as Marketplace,” 346–350. Hinsley considers Boas’s experience of “public anthropology” at the exhibition one of a series of experiences that led to his eventual rejection of the dominant narrative and adoption of cultural relativism (“World as Marketplace,” 363).

87. 87. Hinsley, “World as Marketplace,” 351–363.

88. 88. Conn, Museums and American Intellectual Life, 11–13.

89. 89. Luther, “Labor Museum at Hull House,” 8.

90. 90. Addams, “Humanizing Tendency of Industrial Education.”

91. 91. Washburne, “Labor Museum,” 78, 79–80.

92. 92. Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:966), 9.

93. 93. Galison, “Buildings and the Subject of Science,” 2.

94. 94. Addams, “Tribute to Allen B. Pond,” 29.

95. 95. Addams, “Tribute to Allen B. Pond,” 26, 29; Pond, “‘Settlement House,’ Part 3,” 178; Knight, Citizen, 195–196.

96. 96. Pond, “‘Settlement House,’ Part 1,” 142.

97. 97. Linn, Jane Addams, 209–210.

98. 98. Pond, “‘Settlement House,’ Part 3,” 183.

99. 99. Pond, “‘Settlement House,’ Part 3,” 180, 182. Pond also describes a number of other structures the Ponds built and remodeled during this time period. See also Pond’s blueprint of the Hull House complex in 1900 (Chicago Architectural Club, Book of the Thirteenth Annual Exhibition, 66). For an image of the women’s basketball team and a clipping about them from the Chicago Chronicle, see Bryan and Davis, 100 Years at Hull-House, 73–74.

100. 100. In his discussion of how historians of science have permitted Darwin’s brilliance to overshadow others, Jim Endersby observes, “Victorian natural history could not have existed without obscure colonial collectors, provincial correspondents, specimen stuffers and sellers, journal editors, and hack writers.” These together formed the scientific community without whom Darwin and other naturalists could not have done their work (“Escaping Darwin’s Shadow,” 386–387).

101. 101. Moore, “Day at Hull House,” 640.

102. 102. Bosch, “Ellen Gates Starr,” 840; Boris, Art and Labor, 46; Schultz, “Arts and Crafts Movement.”

103. 103. Addams, “Humanizing Tendency of Industrial Education,” 270–272.

104. 104. Boris, Art and Labor, 13, 32.

105. 105. Boris, Art and Labor, 1–12.

106. 106. Ruskin, Stones of Venice, 3:170–171; Morris, Signs of Change, 144.

107. 107. Boris, Art and Labor, xi–xiii.

108. 108. Ruskin, Stones of Venice, 2:165.

109. 109. Ruskin, Lectures on Art, 92–93. Addams refers to this dictum in the chapter “Educational Methods” in Democracy and Social Ethics, 96.

110. 110. Morris, Hopes and Fears for Art, 14, 94–95; Boris, Art and Labor, 8–12.

111. 111. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 41–42.

112. 112. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 41–42.

113. 113. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 42–43.

114. 114. Veblen gave his talk titled “The Day of the Craftsman and the Instinct of Workmanship” on Feb. 22, 1902 (Hull-House Bulletin 5 [Semi-Annual 1902], 1).

115. 115. Veblen, “Arts and Crafts.”

116. 116. Boris, Art and Labor, 11.

117. 117. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 43.

118. 118. Veblen, “Arts and Crafts,” 108.

119. 119. F. Wright, “Art and Craft of the Machine,” 86–92.

120. 120. Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:966), 7; Harrison, Meaning of History, 437–455.

121. 121. Triggs, Chapters in the History, 92. The society continues to function today. Its website is at http://www.spab.org.uk; accessed Sept. 6, 2016.

122. 122. Milton, Areopagitica, 6; Harrison, Meaning of History, 447; Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:966), 7.

123. 123. Addams, “First Outline” (JAPM 46:966), 6–7.

124. 124. Addams, “First Report,” 15.

125. 125. In “The Child and the Curriculum,” Dewey refers to education as a “continuous reconstruction moving from the child’s present experience out into that represented by the organized bodies of truth that we call studies” (278). “Reconstruction of experience” was a favorite phrase of Dewey’s and he used it on many occasions throughout his writing career.

126. 126. Addams altered this quotation, as she sometimes did, to serve her own purposes. In The Mill on the Floss, Maggie is telling Stephen of the duty created by her family’s claim. Maggie says, “If the past is not to bind us, where can duty lie? We should have no law but the inclination of the moment” (Eliot, Mill on the Floss, 541). This may have been intentional, or Addams may have remembered the line incorrectly. Addams used her version of the quotation in “Address on ‘What Is the Greatest Menace,’ ” 338.

127. 127. Addams, “First Report,” 15.

128. 128. Lears, No Place of Grace, 80. Paul Violas gave a similar argument in “Jane Addams and the New Liberalism.” Rodgers does recognize that the Labor Museum was just one facet of Addams’s larger vision for industrial reform (Work Ethic in Industrial America, 82–86).

129. 129. Addams, “Foreign-Born Children,” 111.

Chapter Six

1. 1. Addams presented the address on November 12, 1898, under the title “The Scope and Meaning of Social Settlements.” See “Proceedings of the November Meeting,” 79. Publicity for the session was in “Announcements for Members,” 65.

2. 2. Excerpts from Addams’s essay are in the American Monthly Review of Reviews’ “Leading Articles of the Month” under the title “The Social Settlement and University Extension.”

3. 3. “Function of the Social Settlement,” Ethical Record, 80; Carson, Settlement Folk, 86–87.

4. 4. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 34, 35.

5. 5. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 36; Gross, “Collaborative Experiments,” 90–92; Harkavy and Puckett, “Lessons from Hull House,” 307–309; Seigfried, introduction to “Feminism,” 625–631.

6. 6. Bud, “‘Applied Science,’” 537–543.

7. 7. Quoted in Gooday, “‘Vague and Artificial,’” 550.

8. 8. Gooday, “‘Vague and Artificial,’” 549–553.

9. 9. Lucier, “Origins of Pure and Applied Science,” 533–534.

10. 10. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 40.

11. 11. S. Webb, “Historic,” 57.

12. 12. M. Marshall, Contesting Cultural Rhetorics, 177–178. Marshall also raises the possibility that “in using their authority so overtly . . . it is possible to read this move as one of Addams making fun of herself for this tactic” (Contesting Cultural Rhetorics, 178).

13. 13. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 34; Dewey, “Significance of the Problem of Knowledge,” 20.

14. 14. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 34; Dewey, “Significance of the Problem of Knowledge,” 20–21.

15. 15. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 34; James, “Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results,” 291.

16. 16. Dewey, “Significance of the Problem of Knowledge.”

17. 17. A JSTOR database search (July 22, 2016) for “reconstruction” between the years 1880 and 1910 yielded over six thousand results. Some of these used the term to refer to post–Civil War Reconstruction and to reconstructing buildings and monuments, but a large number used “reconstruction” in the way Dewey did. See King, “Reconstruction in Theology”; “Reconstruction of History”; Pearson, “Stature of Prehistoric Races”; “Meeting of the Convocation”; Harold, Farming and Railroad Interests; Ellwood, “Psychological Theory of Revolutions”; Greenwood, “High Spirit in American Teachers.”

18. 18. Ward, “Contributions to Social Philosophy,” 801.

19. 19. Deegan, Jane Addams, 73, 94.

20. 20. Vincent, “Province of Sociology.” This was a common view. Le Conte gives the evolutionary order in which the modern sciences emerged: first mathematics, then physics, chemistry, and biology and then the human sciences of anthropology and sociology (“Scientific Relation”). Edward Caird assumed this ordering and enters the debate about how to place the science of religion (Evolution of Religion, 4–5, 9–12).

21. 21. Vincent, “Province of Sociology,” 485.

22. 22. Small, “Static and Dynamic Sociology,” 207–209.

23. 23. Small, “Scholarship and Social Agitation,” 567. Small reinforces the point, stating, “The most impressive lesson which I have learned in the vast sociological laboratory which the city of Chicago constitutes is that action, not speculation, is the supreme teacher. If men will be the most productive scholars in any department of the social sciences, let them gain time and material by cooperating in the social work of their community” (“Scholarship and Social Agitation,” 581–582).

24. 24. Giddings, “Province of Sociology,” 71–72.

25. 25. Hegner, “Scientific Value of the Social Settlements,” 176.

26. 26. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 177.

27. 27. Kuklick, “Personal Equations.”

28. 28. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 163, 176.

29. 29. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 34.

30. 30. Small, Adam Smith and Modern Sociology, 22.

31. 31. Dewey, “Significance of the Problem of Knowledge,” 22, 23.

32. 32. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 34; also in Dewey, “Significance of the Problem of Knowledge,” 20.

33. 33. Ely, “Constitution, By-Laws, and Resolutions,” 35–36.

34. 34. Brinton, “Aims of Anthropology,” 241–242, 250–252.

35. 35. Geddes, “Civics I,” 111.

36. 36. Geddes, “Civics I,” 115.

37. 37. Geddes, “Civics I,” 104.

38. 38. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 38–39. For how Powers gained loyalty from Italians, see Nelli, “John Powers and the Italians,” 67–71.

39. 39. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 39; Dewey, “Significance of the Problem of Knowledge,” 20.

40. 40. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 160.

41. 41. Joslin, Jane Addams, 55. For an extensive comparison of Addams’s and Tolstoy’s thinking, see Cracraft, Two Shining Souls.

42. 42. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 34; James, “Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results,” 290, 291.

43. 43. James, “Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results,” 287–288.

44. 44. The classic text on romanticism in literature is Abrams, Mirror and the Lamp. See 21–26 and 47–69. For the influence of romanticism on William James, see Goodman, American Philosophy and the Romantic Tradition, chapter 3.

45. 45. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 36. The italicized passages in the first paragraph come from Tolstoy’s paragraph that reads, “The business of art lies just in this—to make that understood and felt which, in the form of an argument, might be incomprehensible and inaccessible. Usually it seems to the recipient of a truly artistic impression that he knew the thing before but had been unable to express it” (What Is Art?, 102). The italicized passages in the second paragraph are from Tolstoy’s passage, “The chief peculiarity of this feeling is that the receiver of a truly artistic impression is so united to the artist that he feels as if the work were his own and not some one else’s—as if what it expresses were just what he had long been wishing to express. A real work of art destroys, in the consciousness of the receiver, the separation between himself and the artist, and not that alone, but also between himself and all whose minds receive this work of art. In this freeing of our personality from its separation and isolation, in this uniting of it with others, lies the chief characteristic and the great attractive force of art” (What Is Art?, 153).

46. 46. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 38. Tolstoy’s passage reads, “Humanity unceasingly moves forward from a lower, more partial, and obscure understanding of life, to one more general and more lucid” (What Is Art?, 53).

47. 47. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 37, 38.

48. 48. In Twenty Years at Hull-House, Addams inserts a number of unattributed quotations and paraphrases from Appreciations. For example, she writes of Wordsworth’s “impassioned belief in the efficacious spirit capable of companionship with man which resides in particular spots” (Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 228; compare with Pater, Appreciations, 44). Also, to describe the tendency of settlement residents to work to the point of exhaustion, she paraphrases an extensive passage from Pater (Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 255; Pater, Appreciations, 59).

49. 49. Pater, Appreciations, 118–119.

50. 50. Tolstoy, What Is Art?, 156–157.

51. 51. Tolstoy, What Is Art?, 159.

52. 52. Addams, “Growth of Corporate Consciousness,” 40–42.

53. 53. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 53–54.

54. 54. Addams, “Growth of Corporate Consciousness,” 42; Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 55.

55. 55. Tolstoy, What to Do?, 171–191; Tolstoy, What Is Art?, 202–206.

56. 56. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 46–47. The corresponding phrases in Tolstoy are in What Is Art? (206) and What to Do? (179, 180).

57. 57. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 44.

58. 58. These are Addams’s examples (“Function of the Social Settlement,” 47–48).

59. 59. Lightman, Victorian Popularizers of Science, 11. Here Lightman is drawing from Raymond Williams’s analysis of keywords (Williams, Keywords).

60. 60. Lightman, Victorian Popularizers of Science, 353–354. Here Lightman is quoting from Darwin’s letter to Huxley dated Jan. 4, 1865.

61. 61. Lightman, Victorian Popularizers of Science, 494, chapter 5.

62. 62. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 47.

63. 63. Addams’s reflections on Tolstoy’s ideas certainly helped her clarify her own thinking. Scholars differ, though, on how much Addams adopted Tolstoy’s ideas as her own. Hamington writes that Addams regarded Tolstoy as a moral hero, while noting that Addams found some of his ideas ill-suited to urban Chicago (Social Philosophy of Jane Addams, 22–23, 175). Knight, who also acknowledges differences between Addams’s and Tolstoy’s thinking, assigns Tolstoy a central place in Addams’s moral universe. His Christian nonviolence became “a shaping force in her life” (Citizen, 145, 322. See 371–377 for Knight’s account of Addams’s visit to Tolstoy.) For an analysis of Addams’s very strong though subtle critique of Tolstoy’s ideas in her account of visiting his estate, see Fischer, “Pluralistic Universe in Twenty Years,” 9–14. Cracraft is painstaking in sorting out differences in their views (Two Shining Souls; see particularly chapter 5).

64. 64. “Woman’s Club Celebrates Tolstoi.”

65. 65. Le Conte, “Theory of Evolution and Social Progress,” 481–482.

66. 66. A. Abbott, Department & Discipline, 85, 96; see also 83–103.

67. 67. Ross, Origins of American Social Science, 156–162.

68. 68. Porter, “Social Sciences,” 254–257.

69. 69. Porter, “Social Sciences,” 279.

70. 70. Porter, “Social Sciences,” 284. Historian Andrew Jewett names as “scientific democrats” a significant number of social theorists working in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. He attributes to them the view that science “embodied and inculcated a set of personal virtues, skills, beliefs, and values that could ground a modern, democratic public culture” (Science, Democracy, 2). Jewett assigns Dewey central status and names Addams as a member of this group (Science, Democracy, 125n16, 1–19) However, Jewett identifies “democratic public culture” as “popular sovereignty” and explicitly excluding citizen participation from his definition (Science, Democracy, 9–10). This conception of democracy is so thin that neither Addams nor Dewey would claim it as their own.

71. 71. Porter, “Social Sciences,” 278–279.

72. 72. Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 48.

73. 73. Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 44–51.

74. 74. These included Sophinisba Breckenridge and Edith Abbott of Hull House. See Rosenberg, Beyond Separate Spheres, 50.

75. 75. Addams, “Function of the Social Settlement,” 35.

Chapter Seven

1. 1. These quotations are collected in an ad titled “Brief Characterizations” (JAPM 82:110). The Jane Addams Papers (Microfilm) has a large collection of reviews. See reel 82, frames 1–199. Addams used a commercial clipping service, and citations to the reviews’ sources are not always complete.

2. 2. Knight, Citizen, 400.

3. 3. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 7.

4. 4. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 8. The first sentence of this quotation is taken largely from historian W. E. H. Lecky. He writes, “Much, too, of the insensibility and hardness of the world is due to a simple want of imagination which prevents us from adequately realising the sufferings of others” (Map of Life, 80). In substituting “experiences” for Lecky’s “sufferings,” Addams changes the meaning of the sentence considerably.

5. 5. Ball, review of Democracy and Social Ethics, 108–109. Ball’s review is in the Economic Review, a publication of the Oxford University branch of the Christian Social Union.

6. 6. In Democracy and Social Ethics Addams does not name George Pullman but refers to him only as “the president of the company” (64).

7. 7. I thank Judy D. Whipps for bringing this point to my attention. Whipps notes that from the time Addams wrote Democracy and Social Ethics, the ideas behind social democracy served as her conceptual mooring, even though “democracy” virtually dropped out of her vocabulary. Whipps attributes this to how the public came to elide democracy with American nationalism during World War I (“Examining Addams’s Democratic Theory,” 276–277, 279).

8. 8. Ely to Addams, Oct. 13, 1906; Addams to Ely, Oct. 15, 1906.

9. 9. Small, Significance of Sociology for Ethics, 36.

10. 10. Addams’s lectures at Iowa College are summarized in Scarlet and Black, Iowa College, Grinnell, Iowa, vol. 4, no. 9 (Mar. 2, 1899), 1; and vol. 4, no. 10 (Mar. 5, 1898), 1, 4. Addams enclosed a tentative list of her Davenport lectures with this title in a letter to Richard T. Ely, Sept. 29, 1899.

11. 11. Addams, “Program of Lectures”; Knight, Citizen, 397–398.

12. 12. The Chautauqua Assembly Herald published extensive summaries of Addams’s lectures on domestic service, industry, and education as beginning with feudal practices and moving into the present. These lectures were titled “Democracy and Education,” “Democracy and Industry,” and “Democracy and Domestic Service.”

13. 13. Among the reviews that refer to Addams as a sociologist and Democracy and Social Ethics a sociological study, see “The Message of a Good Woman,” Chicago Tribune, Apr. 16, 1902, p. 8 (JAPM 82:17); a review from Living Church, May 31, 1902 (JAPM 82:52); a review from Catholic World, June 1902 (JAPM 82:54); and one by Lillian Gray for the Springfield Union and Worcester Spy, Nov. 9, 1902 (JAPM 82:86).

14. 14. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 6, 7, 7, 8, 9.

15. 15. For Addams’s prophetic voice, see Knight, Citizen, 332; Knight, Jane Addams, 139; Hamington, Social Philosophy of Jane Addams, 41; Polacheck and Epstein, I Came a Stranger, 103. For Addams’s sociological voice, see the review by Charles Henderson for the American Journal of Sociology. He writes, “Here is made articulate the unconscious movement of the educated American toward a social standard of moral obligations” (136). See also the review by Zona Vallance in Ethics. Vallance was one of the contributors to Stanton Coit’s volume, Ethical Democracy.

16. 16. Addams, “Program of Lectures,” 5.

17. 17. Schäfer, American Progressives, 37.

18. 18. Herbst, The German Historical School in American Scholarship, 8, 203.

19. 19. In Schäfer, American Progressives, for Adams, see 46; for Ely, 84–87; for Patten, 51–52; for Devine, 141–146; for Ross, 54–55; for Du Bois, 65. For the University of Chicago sociologists, see 164. Florence Kelley studied in Germany with Eduard Bernstein, who was not associated with the historical school. See Schäfer, American Progressives, 39. For Balch and Kingsbury Simhkovitch, see Gwinn, Emily Greene Balch, 36–44. Daniel Rodgers has an extensive discussion of the influence of the German historicist school on the early days of economics in the United States (Atlantic Crossings, chapter 3).

20. 20. Addams took four years of German in college (Selected Papers, 1:166). She spent several months in Germany during her first European tour of 1883–1885 (Selected Papers, 2:199–200). She spent a brief time in Germany on her second tour in January 1888 (Selected Papers, 2:486–488).

21. 21. Schäfer, American Progressives, 16.

22. 22. Schäfer, American Progressives, 14–15, 38, 40–46.

23. 23. These include Lutheran theologian Alexander von Oettingen in Die Moralstatistik und die christliche Sittenlehre, Versuch einer Socialethik (1874) and legal scholar Rudolph von Jhering in Der Zweck im Recht (1887–1883). The use of the terms spread beyond Germany. A reviewer for the International Journal of Ethics notes that Danish philosopher Harald von Höffding “disposed of” individual ethics in a mere sixty pages, while social ethics “require[d] three hundred” (Gizycki, “Review of Ethik,” 123).

24. 24. Ely, Ground under Our Feet, 41–45.

25. 25. Addams, “Program of Lectures.”

26. 26. Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings, 101–102; Ely, Ground under our Feet, 133; Herbst, German Historical School, 134, 145.

27. 27. Ely, “Ethics and Economics,” 530.

28. 28. Ely, “Ethics and Economics,” 531.

29. 29. Ely, “Ethics and Economics,” 532–533.

30. 30. Ely, Studies in the Evolution of Industrial Society, 227n1.

31. 31. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 6–7.

32. 32. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 7.

33. 33. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 6

34. 34. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 6, 8–9. The embedded quotation is from G. Shaw, “Illusions of Socialism,” 118.

1. 35. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 6–7.

2. 36. Dorrien, Social Ethics in the Making, 10, 20; Gonce, “Social Gospel,” 641–643.

3. 37. For the social gospel movement in the United States and in England, see Phillips, Kingdom on Earth. Dorrien discusses Catholic participation in the social gospel movement, with special attention to Father John A. Ryan (Social Ethics in the Making, 185–215).

4. 38. While many social gospelers were social progressives, they differed on issues such as imperialism, racism, and war. See Dorrien, Social Ethics in the Making, 30–32, 60, 73, 76–77.

5. 39. Rauschenbusch to Addams, Feb. 24, 1910.

6. 40. Ely, Social Aspects of Christianity, 2, 5, 9.

7. 41. Ely, Social Aspects of Christianity, 24–25.

8. 42. The first review was published in Living Church, May 31, 1902 (JAPM 82:52). The second was in the Monthly Leader (of the Christian Social Union), Dec. 1902, 13 (JAPM 82:182).

9. 43. Edwards, “Jane Addams, Walter Rauschenbusch, and Dorothy Day,” 151–157; Dorrien, Social Ethics in the Making, 175–185.

10. 44. Dorrien, Social Ethics in the Making, 185.

11. 45. Matthew 5:6, KJV.

12. 46. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 6; Matthew 25:36–40, KJV.

13. 47. Schäfer, American Progressives, 170; Radest, Toward Common Ground, 29; Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings, 101. Seligman is most remembered for his vigorous advocacy leading to the progressive income tax (Rodgers, Atlantic Crossings, 109).

14. 48. Seligman to Addams, Apr. 26, 1902.

15. 49. Addams to Richard T. Ely, Sept. 29, 1899.

16. 50. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 119; Coit, “Dynamics of Democracy,” 348.

17. 51. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 99; MacDonald, “People in Power,” 76.

18. 52. MacDonald, “People in Power,” 71, 76.

19. 53. Addams, “Program of Lectures,” 11–13. Addams gives titles and short descriptions of each lecture in this document.

20. 54. Darwin, Origin of Species, 6th ed., 435.

21. 55. Addams, Twenty Years at Hull-House, 159.

22. 56. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 74.

23. 57. Spencer, “Social Organism,” 56.

24. 58. Addams, “Growth of Corporate Consciousness,” 40.

25. 59. Addams, “Growth of Corporate Consciousness,” 40–41.

26. 60. Joslin, Jane Addams, 59–60.

27. 61. Joslin, Jane Addams, 72–73.

28. 62. Addams, “Arts and Crafts and the Settlement,” 2.

29. 63. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 48, 56.

30. 64. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 49.

31. 65. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 52.

32. 66. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 64.

33. 67. For example, both Lear and the parents assert their “authority through all the entanglements of wounded affection” (Addams, “Modern Tragedy” [JAPM 46:722], 5); Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 4. Both Cordelia and the college-educated daughter feel the impulse to become “a citizen of the world” (Addams, “Modern Tragedy” [JAPM 46:722], 7; Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 4).

34. 68. Addams, “College Woman and the Family Claim,” 3–7.

35. 69. Joslin reads this chapter in the book as essentially autobiographical, reflecting Addams’s experiences with her own father and with S. Weir Mitchell, who treated her for neurasthenia (Jane Addams, 63–64). Knight interprets Addams’s discussion of Lear and Cordelia where originally placed in “A Modern Tragedy” as autobiographical (Citizen, 358–359).

36. 70. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 99.

37. 71. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 100.

38. 72. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 163.

39. 73. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 176; Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 31–32.

40. 74. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 176–177.

41. 75. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 178.

42. 76. Joslin reads the essay as autobiographical ((Jane Addams, 61–63).

43. 77. Hamington seems to read the essay this way (Social Philosophy of Jane Addams, 46, 79–80). Elizabeth Agnew’s extended discussion also presents this argument, but she goes on to discuss how the relationship between the two approaches was far more complicated and intertwined than it is often conveyed (From Charity to Social Work, 84–89, 105–109).

44. 78. Edwin L. Shuman, Chicago Record-Herald, Apr. 1902 (JAPM 82:13).

45. 79. Addams, “Subtle Problems of Charity,” 165; Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 14–15.

46. 80. This phrase, “rude rule of right and wrong,” is a direct quote from Darwin’s Descent of Man, 1:99.

47. 81. Addams makes this point repeatedly. See Democracy and Social Ethics, 81, 85, 91, 93, 94.

48. 82. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 96–97.

49. 83. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 80.

50. 84. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 95–96.

51. 85. Sealander, Grand Plans; see especially chapter 2, “Employee Welfare at National Cash Register.” Also see the autobiography of its first welfare director, Lena Harvey Tracy, How My Heart Sang. For an account of the welfare program in John Patterson’s words, see Crowther, John H. Patterson.

52. 86. “Founder of Hull House.” The settlement house was named the House of Usefulness. Members of its staff visited Hull House (“Trip of N.C.R. Century Club Delegates”). Etta Booth Garretson, who had taught English classes at Hull House, became head resident of the NCR settlement in 1902 (“Re-Opening of the N.C.R. House”).

53. 87. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 96.

54. 88. Review of Democracy and Social Ethics, Gunton’s Magazine (JAPM 82:127); “Labor Differences Settled.” After the strike Patterson declared a nonunion shop and cut back on educational offerings for the workers. Addams saw this connection between the two employers. In “Industrial Amelioration” she refers to “a recent strike of the employees of a large factory in Ohio” and goes on to describe the company president in the same terms she uses for Pullman (Democracy and Social Ethics, 70).

55. 89. See reviews by Henderson, Hobson, and Vallance.

56. 90. Ely, “Industrial Betterment,” 552.

57. 91. See, for example, Hamington, “Addams’s Radical Democracy.” For a carefully constructed critique of pragmatists who make such a divide between pragmatism and liberalism, see Hay, “Consonances between Liberalism and Pragmatism.”

58. 92. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 119.

59. 93. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 147.

60. 94. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 119.

61. 95. Addams, “Settlement as a Factor,” 146.

62. 96. Eliot, Mill on the Floss, 331–332.

63. 97. Addams, Second Twenty Years, 6. Her reference to life’s “slow stain” may have come from Shelley’s “Adonais” (Second Twenty Years, 4; Shelley, “Adonais,” 430).

64. 98. Shuman, Chicago Record-Herald, Apr. 1902 (JAPM 82:13).

65. 99. “Message of a Good Woman,” Chicago Tribune, Apr. 16, 1902 (JAPM 82:17).

66. 100. Mail Times, Des Moines, IA, Oct. 11, 1902 (JAPM 82:84).

67. 101. The clipping service marked the review “New York City” but gives no other information (JAPM 82:52).

68. 102. Maude, review of Democracy and Social Ethics, 159.

69. 103. James, Principles of Psychology, 1:243.

70. 104. Addams, “Program of Lectures.”

71. 105. Eliot, Selected Critical Writings, 248. The quotation is from Eliot’s review of Ruskin’s Modern Painters, vol. 3.

72. 106. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 78.

73. 107. See R. Jones, “On Understanding a Sociological Classic,” 291. Jones makes a similar observation in his discussion of scholarship on Émile Durkheim. He brings out the distinction between historically grounded statements regarding what Durkheim meant or could have meant at the time of writing and statements that indicate “heuristic value” that readers gain from reading his texts. Both are valuable, but they should not be confused.

74. 108. For accounts of the development of scholarship on Addams, see Knight, Citizen, 405–412. See also Fischer, Nackenoff, and Chmielewski, introduction, 3–8; Elshtain, “Return to Hull House,” 257–259.

75. 109. See Hamington, Embodied Care, chapter 3, “Jane Addams and the Social Habits of Care,” 89–121.

76. 110. Whipps, “Examining Addams’s Democratic Theory.”

77. 111. See Sarvasy, “Engendering Democracy”; Nackenoff, “New Politics for New Selves.”

78. 112. James to Addams, Sept. 17, 1902.

79. 113. James, “What Makes a Life Significant,” 156.

80. 114. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 120.

81. 115. Dante, Divine Comedy, Paradiso, cantos 32 and 33.

82. 116. Eliot, Mill on the Floss, 591.

83. 117. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 45. In the passage, Addams mistakenly refers to Tom as “Tim.” “Tom” is Edgar in disguise. The inset quotation, “poor naked wretches,” is from King Lear, act 3, scene 4, line 32.

84. 118. See Knight, Citizen, 35, 39, 114, 316–317.

85. 119. Addams, Democracy and Social Ethics, 120.

Bibliography

Note: Materials by Jane Addams marked as “JAPM” are in the microfilm collection of the Jane Addams Papers. The first number is the reel; the number following the colon is the frame number. See The Jane Addams Papers, 1860–1960 (Microfilm), edited by Mary Lynn McCree Bryan (Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International, 1984).

1. Abbott, Andrew Delano. Department & Discipline: Chicago Sociology at One Hundred. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.

2. Abbott, Lyman. “The Democracy of Learning.” [Stenographic report]. National Educational Association, Journal of Proceedings and Addresses 36 (1897): 190–194.

3. Abrams, M. H. The Mirror and the Lamp: Romantic Theory and the Critical Tradition. New York: Oxford University Press, 1953.

4. Abruzzo, Margaret. Polemical Pain: Slavery, Cruelty, and the Rise of Humanitarianism. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2011.

5. Adams, Henry Carter. Introduction to Philanthropy and Social Progress, edited by Henry C. Adams, v–xi. New York: Crowell, 1893.

6. Addams, Jane. “Address [on Industrial Education].” National Society for the Promotion of Industrial Education, Bulletin, no. 1 (Jan. 1907): 37–44. JAPM 46:1528.

7. ———. “Address on ‘What Is the Greatest Menace to Twentieth Century Progress?’” In “[Report of] the Sunset Club, One Hundred and Eighth Meeting, Held at the Palmer House.” Printed minutes. (Feb. 14, 1901): 338–341. JAPM 46:1029.

8. ———. “Arts and Crafts and the Settlement.” Chautauqua Assembly Herald 27 (July 9, 1902): 2–3. JAPM 46:1112.

9. ———. “A Belated Industry.” American Journal of Sociology 1 (Mar. 1896): 536–550. JAPM 46:743.

10. ———. “The College Woman and Christianity.” Independent 53 (Aug. 8, 1901): 1852–1855. JAPM 46:1036.

11. ———. “The College Woman and the Family Claim.” Commons 3 (Sept. 1898): 3–7. JAPM 46:863.

12. ———. “Christmas Fellowship.” Unity 42 (Dec. 22, 1898): 308–309. JAPM 46:895.

13. ———. “Democracy and Domestic Service.” Chautauqua Assembly Herald 25 (Aug. 11, 1900): 7. JAPM 46:1007.

14. ———. “Democracy and Education.” Chautauqua Assembly Herald 25 (Aug. 9, 1900): 2. JAPM 46:1002.

15. ———. “Democracy and Industry.” Chautauqua Assembly Herald 25 (Aug. 10, 1900): 6. JAPM 46:1004.

16. ———. Democracy and Social Ethics. 1902. Reprint, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2002.

17. ———. “Domestic Service and the Family Claim.” In The World’s Congress of Representative Women, vol. 2, edited by May Wright Sewall, 626–631. Chicago: Rand, McNally, 1894. JAPM 46:570.

18. ———. “Ethical Survivals in City Immorality.” Typed manuscript (Dec 1897–Jan 1898). JAPM 46:815.

19. ———. “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption.” International Journal of Ethics 8 (Apr. 1898): 273–291.

20. ———. The Excellent Becomes the Permanent. 1932. Reprint, Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1970.

21. ———. “First Outline of a Labor Museum at Hull-House, Chicago.” Typed manuscript. 1900. JAPM 46:966, continued at JAPM 46:977.

22. ———. “First Report of the Labor Museum at Hull House.” Privately printed, 1902. JAPM 46:1078.

23. ———. “Foreign-Born Children in the Primary Grades.” National Educational Association, Journal of Proceedings and Addresses 36 (1897): 104–112. JAPM 46:785.

24. ———. “A Function of the Social Settlement.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 13 (May 1899): 33–55.

25. ———. “Growth of Corporate Consciousness.” Illinois Conference of Charities, Proceedings (1897): 40–42. JAPM 46:795.

26. ———. “Hull-House as a Type of College Settlement.” Wisconsin State Conference of Charities and Corrections. Proceedings (1894). JAPM 46:577.

27. ———. “The Humanizing Tendency of Industrial Education.” Chautauquan 39 (May 1904): 266–272. JAPM 46:1256.

28. ———. “The Larger Aspects of the Woman’s Movement.” American Academy of Political and Social Science, Annals 56 (Nov. 1914): 1–8. JAPM 47:1084.

29. ———. Letter to John Weber Addams. May 10, 1885. JAPM 2:64.

30. ———. Letter to Richard T. Ely. Sept. 29, 1899. JAPM 3:1441.

31. ———. Letter to Richard T. Ely. Oct. 15, 1906. JAPM 4:1478.

32. ———. Letter to Patrick Geddes. Feb. 20, 1923. JAPM 15:618.

33. ———. Letter to Sarah Alice Addams Haldeman. Jan. 19, 1881. JAPM 1:577.

34. ———. Letter to Sarah Alice Addams Haldeman. Oct. 23, 1885. JAPM 2:124.

35. ———. Letter to Samuel M. Jones. May 28, 1898. JAPM 3:1094.

36. ———. Letter to Paul Kellogg. Nov. 23, 1905. JAPM 4:1181.

37. ———. Letter to Mary Addams Linn. Apr. 1, 1889. JAPM 2:1050.

38. ———. Letter to Henry Demarest Lloyd. Dec. 22, 1895. JAPM 2:1829.

39. ———. Letter to Vida Scudder. Jan. 21, 1899. JAPM 3:1277.

40. ———. Letter to Lillian D. Wald. Apr. 7, 1899. JAPM 3:1325.

41. ———. The Long Road of Woman’s Memory. 1916. Reprint, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2002.

42. ———. “A Modern Lear.” Survey 29 (Nov. 2, 1912): 131–137.

43. ———. “A Modern Tragedy.” 1895? (sic). Typescript manuscript. JAPM 46:647.

44. ———. “A Modern Tragedy: An Analysis of the Pullman Strike.” Typed manuscript. 1896? (sic). JAPM 46:722.

45. ———. A New Conscience and an Ancient Evil. 1912. Reprint, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2002.

46. ———. “The New Internationalism.” In Proceedings of the National Arbitration and Peace Congress, New York, Apr. 14–17, 1907, 213–216. New York: American Peace Congress.

47. ———. Newer Ideals of Peace. 1907. Reprint, Urbana: University of Illinois Press. 2007.

48. ———. “The Object of Social Settlements.” Union Signal 22 (Mar. 5, 1896): 148–149. JAPM 46:752.

49. ———. “The Objective Value of a Social Settlement.” In Philanthropy and Social Progress, edited by Henry C. Adams, 27–56. New York: Crowell, 1893.

50. ———. “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall.” Typed manuscript. Dec. 3, 1891. JAPM 46:480.

51. ———. “Program of Lectures: Democracy and Social Ethics.” 1899. JAPM 30:840.

52. ———. “Second Day, Morning Session.” Civic Federation of Chicago. Congress on Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration, 48–49. Chicago: W. C. Hollister and Bro., 1894.

53. ———. The Second Twenty Years at Hull-House. New York: Macmillan, 1930.

54. ———. The Selected Papers of Jane Addams. Vol. 1, Preparing to Lead, 1860–81. Edited by Mary Lynn McCree Bryan, Barbara Bair, and Maree de Angury. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2003.

55. ———. The Selected Papers of Jane Addams. Vol. 2, Venturing into Usefulness, 1881–88. Edited by Mary Lynn McCree Bryan, Barbara Bair, and Maree de Angury. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009.

56. ———. “The Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement.” 1895. In Hull-House Maps and Papers, by residents of Hull-House, edited by Rima Lunin Schultz, 138–149. Reprint, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2007.

57. ———. “Social Education of the Industrial Democracy: Settlement Problems in Educational Work with Adults: Labor Museum at Hull House.” Commons 5 (June 30, 1900): 17–20. JAPM 46:997.

58. ———. “The Social Settlement and University Extension.” American Monthly Review of Reviews 20 (July–Dec. 1899): 93–94.

59. ———. “Social Settlements in Illinois.” 1906. Illinois State Historical Society, Transactions, 162–170. JAPM 46:1418.

60. ———. “The Social Test.” Public Opinion 28 (Mar. 29, 1900): 398. JAPM 46:994.

61. ———. The Spirit of Youth and the City Streets. 1909. Reprint, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1972.

62. ———. “The Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements.” In Philanthropy and Social Progress, edited by Henry C. Adams, 1–26. New York: Crowell, 1893.

63. ———. “The Subtle Problems of Charity.” Atlantic Monthly 83 (Feb. 1899): 163–178. JAPM 46:916.

64. ———. “Tribute to Allen B. Pond.” In Memorial Service for Allen B. Pond (stenographic transcription), 24–32. Chicago: City Club, 1929.

65. ———. Twenty Years at Hull-House. 1910. Reprint, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1990.

66. ———. “Woman and the State.” Feb. 2, 1911. Typed manuscript. JAPM 47:0096.

67. ———. “Woman’s Work for Chicago.” Municipal Affairs 2 (Sep. 1898): 502–508. JAPM 46:871.

68. ———. “Women and War.” In Addams’s Essays and Speeches on Peace, edited by Marilyn Fischer and Judy D. Whipps, 75–78. Bristol, UK: Thoemmes, 2003.

69. Adler, Felix. Creed and Deed: A Series of Discourses. New York: Putnam, 1880.

70. ———. “The Freedom of Ethical Fellowship.” International Journal of Ethics 1 (Oct. 1890): 16–30.

71. ———. “Modern Skepticism and Ethical Culture.” Forum 16 (Nov. 1893): 379–387.

72. Agnew, Elizabeth N. From Charity to Social Work: Mary E. Richmond and the Creation of an American Profession. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004.

73. Anders, Kelly Louise, and Maria Cisaltina da Silveira Nunes Dinis. “Demonstrating Citizen Leadership: A Case Study of Jane Addams.” International Journal of Interdisciplinary Civic and Political Studies 10 (Mar. 22, 2015): 13–19.

74. “Announcements for Members.” Bulletin of the Academy (American Academy of Political and Social Science), new series, 6 (Nov. 1, 1898): 65–66.

75. Anonymous. Letter to Jane Addams. Jan. 17, 1898. JAPM 3:939.

76. Ariew, Roger. Descartes and the Last Scholastics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1999.

77. Bain, Alexander. English Composition and Rhetoric: A Manual. Rev. ed. New York: Appleton, 1867.

78. Baker, Ray Stannard. “Hull House and the Ward Boss.” Outlook 58 (Mar. 26, 1898): 769–771.

79. Ball, Sidney. Review of Democracy and Social Ethics, by Jane Addams. Oxford Review 13 (1903): 108–109.

80. Bannister, Robert C. Social Darwinism: Science and Myth in Anglo-American Social Thought. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1979.

81. Barnett, Samuel A. Letter to Jane Addams. Dec. 26, 1982. JAPM 2:1348.

82. Barrett, James R. “Americanization from the Bottom Up: Immigration and the Remaking of the Working Class in the United States, 1880–1930.” Journal of American History 79 (Dec. 1992): 996–1020.

83. Beer, Gillian. Darwin’s Plots: Evolutionary Narrative in Darwin, George Eliot, and Nineteenth-Century Fiction. 2nd ed. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

84. Bevir, Mark, ed. Historicism and the Human Sciences in Victorian Britain. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

85. ———. “Historicism and the Human Sciences in Victorian Britain.” In Historicism and the Human Sciences in Victorian Britain, edited by Mark Bevir, 1–20. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

86. ———. The Making of British Socialism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2011.

87. Boas, Franz. The Mind of Primitive Man. New York: Macmillan, 1911.

88. Bois, Jules. “The New Religions of America, IV Ethical Culture—A Second Reformation.” Forum 75 (Feb. 1926): 252–263.

89. Bonomo, L. Ryan Musgrave. “Addams’s Philosophy of Art: Feminist Aesthetics and Moral Imagination at Hull House.” In Feminist Interpretations of Jane Addams, edited by Maurice Hamington, 107–122. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2010.

90. “Books Which Have Survived from Jane Addams’ Personal Library at Hull-House.” University of Illinois at Chicago Circle Jane Addams Memorial Collection. JAPM 28:870.

91. Boris, Eileen. Art and Labor: Ruskin, Morris, and the Craftsman Ideal in America. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1986.

92. Bosch, Jennifer L. “Ellen Gates Starr.” In Women Building Chicago, 1790–1990: A Biographical Dictionary, edited by Rima Lunin Schultz and Adele Hast, 838–842. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2001.

93. Bourne, Randolph S. “Trans-National America.” Atlantic Monthly 118 (July 1916): 86–97.

94. Bowler, Peter J. The Non-Darwinian Revolution: Reinterpreting a Historical Myth. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1988.

95. Bozeman, Theodore Dwight. “Joseph Le Conte: Organic Science and a ‘Sociology for the South.’” Journal of Southern History 38 (Nov. 1973): 565–582.

96. Brautigam, Jeffrey C. “Sorting Out Social Darwinism.” History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 12 (1990): 111–116.

97. Brinton, Daniel G. “The Aims of Anthropology.” Science 2 (1895): 241–252.

98. Bross, William. History of Chicago: Historical and Commercial Statistics, Sketches, Facts and Figures. Chicago: Jansen, McClurg, 1876.

99. Brown, Victoria Bissell. “Advocate for Democracy: Jane Addams and the Pullman Strike.” In The Pullman Strike and the Crisis of the 1890s: Essays on Labor and Politics, edited by Richard Schneirov, Shelton Stromquist, and Nick Salvatore, 130–158. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992.

100. ———. The Education of Jane Addams. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2004.

101. Bryan, Mary Lynn McCree, and Allen F. Davis, eds. 100 Years at Hull-House. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990.

102. Bryan, Mary Lynn McCree, Nancy Slote, and Maree De Angury, eds. The Jane Addams Papers: A Comprehensive Guide. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1996.

103. Bud, Robert. “‘Applied Science’: A Phrase in Search of a Meaning.” Isis 103 (2012): 537–545.

104. Budd, Louis J. “The American Background.” In The Cambridge Companion to American Realism and Naturalism: Howells to London, edited by Donald Pizer, 21–46. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995.

105. Butler, Lance St. John. Victorian Doubt: Literary and Cultural Discourses. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1990.

106. Caird, Edward. The Evolution of Religion. 2 vols. Glasgow: James Maclehose, 1893.

107. Carson, Mina. Settlement Folk: Social Thought and the American Settlement Movement. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1990.

108. Cartelli, Thomas. Repositioning Shakespeare: National Formations, Postcolonial Appropriations. London: Routledge, 1999.

109. Chandler, Alice. A Dream of Order: The Medieval Ideal in Nineteenth-Century English Literature. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1970.

110. Chicago Architectural Club. Book of the Thirteenth Annual Exhibition. Chicago: Chicago Architectural Club, 1900.

111. Chinn, Sarah E. “‘To Reveal the Humble Immigrant Parents to Their Own Children’: Immigrant Women, Their American Daughters, and the Hull-House Labor Museum.” In Our Sisters’ Keepers: Nineteenth-Century Benevolence Literature by American Women, edited by Jill Bergman and Debra Bernardi, 227–248. Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2005.

112. “Circuit Court of Norfolk County. Port Norfolk Land Co. v. Portsmouth Street Railway Co. September 11, 1899.” Virginia Law Register 5 (1899): 477–484.

113. Clute, Oscar. “The Head and the Hand.” National Educational Association, Journal of Proceedings and Addresses 36 (1897): 737–742.

114. Coit, Stanton. “The Dynamics of Democracy.” In Ethical Democracy: Essays in Social Dynamics, edited by Stanton Coit, 303–348. London: Grant Richards, 1900.

115. Coleridge, Samuel T. Coleridge’s Essays and Lectures on Shakespeare and Some Other Old Poets and Dramatists. New York: E. P. Dutton, 1907.

116. Collini, Stefan. “Sociology and Idealism in Britain 1880–1920.” European Journal of Sociology 19 (May 1978): 3–50.

117. Commons, John R. Social Reform and the Church. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell, 1894.

118. Comte, Auguste. The Positive Philosophy of Auguste Comte. Vol. 1. Translated by Harriet Martineau. London: John Chapman, 1853.

119. ———. System of Positive Polity. 4 vols. New York: Burt Franklin, 1875.

120. Conn, Steven. Museums and American Intellectual Life, 1876–1926. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1998.

121. Crabb, George. English Synonymes Explained. New York: Harper, 1897.

122. Cracraft, James. Two Shining Souls: Jane Addams, Leo Tolstoy, and the Quest for Global Peace. New York: Lexington Books, 2012.

123. Creelman, Harlan. “The Problem of Well-Being and Suffering in the Old Testament. II.” Biblical World 7 (1896): 325–338.

124. Cremin, Lawrence A. The Transformation of the School. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1961.

125. Crook, D. P. Benjamin Kidd: Portrait of a Social Darwinist. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984.

126. Crowther, Samuel. John H. Patterson: Pioneer in Industrial Welfare. New York: Doubleday, Page, 1923.

127. Cubberley, Ellwood P. Changing Conceptions of Education. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1909.

128. Daniels, Roger. Coming to America: A History of Immigration and Ethnicity in American Life. 2nd ed. New York: Perennial, 2002.

129. Danisch, Robert. Pragmatism, Democracy, and the Necessity of Rhetoric. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press, 2007.

130. Dante. Divine Comedy. Translated by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1867.

131. Darwin, Charles. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. 2 vols. New York: D. Appleton, 1871.

132. ———. The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. 1st ed. London: John Murray, 1859.

133. ———. The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. 6th ed. London: Odhams, 1872.

134. Daston, Lorraine, and Peter Galison. “The Image of Objectivity.” Representations 40 (1992): 81–128.

135. Davis, Allen F. American Heroine: The Life and Legend of Jane Addams. Chicago: Ivan R. Dee, 2000.

136. ———. Spearheads for Reform. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967.

137. Dawson, Gowan. “Science and Its Popularization.” In The Cambridge Companion to English Literature, 1830–1914, edited by Joanne Shattock, 165–183. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2010.

138. Dawson, Gowan, and Bernard Lightman. General introduction to Victorian Science and Literature, edited by Gowan Dawson and Bernard Lightman, vol. 1, Negotiating Boundaries, vii–xix. London: Pickering and Chatto, 2011.

139. Deegan, Mary Jo. Jane Addams and the Men of the Chicago School, 1892–1918. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books, 1988.

140. Delegard, Kirsten. “Women’s Movements, 1880s–1920s.” In A Companion to American Women’s History, edited by Nancy A. Hewitt, 227–249. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2005.

141. Devine, Henry C. “People’s Cooperative Banks.” Charity Organisation Review, new series, 19 (Mar. 1906): 131–143.

142. Dewey, John. “The Child and the Curriculum.” 1902. In John Dewey: The Middle Works, 1899–1924, vol. 2, edited by Jo Ann Boydston, 273–291. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1976.

143. ———. “The Evolutionary Method as Applied to Morality.” 1902. In John Dewey: The Middle Works, 1899–1924, vol. 2, edited by Jo Ann Boydston, 3–38. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1976.

144. ———. “The Influence of Darwinism on Philosophy.” 1910. In John Dewey: The Middle Works, 1899–1924, vol. 4, edited by Jo Ann Boydston, 3–14. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1977.

145. ———. Letter to Jane Addams. Oct. 12, 1894. In The Correspondence of John Dewey, vol. 1, 1871–1918, electronic ed. Charlottesville, VA: InteLex Corp., 1999.

146. ———. Letter to Jane Addams. Jan. 19, 1896. JAPM 3:29.

147. ———. Letter to Alice Chipman Dewey. Oct. 10, 1894. In The Correspondence of John Dewey, vol. 1, 1871–1918, electronic ed. Charlottesville, VA: InteLex Corp., 1999.

148. ———. Letter to Alice Chipman Dewey and children. Aug. 31, 1894. In The Correspondence of John Dewey, vol. 1, 1871–1918, electronic ed. Charlottesville, VA: InteLex Corp., 1999.

149. ———. Logic: The Theory of Inquiry. 1938. John Dewey: The Later Works, 1925–1953, vol. 12, 1938, edited by Jo Ann Boydston. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1986.

150. ———. “My Pedagogic Creed.” 1897. In John Dewey: The Early Works, 1882–1898, vol. 5, 1895–1898, edited by Jo Ann Boydston, 84–95. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1972.

151. ———. The School and Society. 1900. In John Dewey: The Middle Works, 1899–1924, vol. 1, 1899–1901, edited by Jo Ann Boydston, 1–109. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1976.

152. ———. “The School as Social Centre.” 1902. In John Dewey: The Middle Works, 1899–1924, vol. 2, 1902–1903, edited by Jo Ann Boydston, 80–93. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1976.

153. ———. “The Significance of the Problem of Knowledge.” 1897. In John Dewey: The Early Works, 1882–1898, vol. 5, 1895–1898, edited by Jo Ann Boydston, 4–24. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1972.

154. Dewey, John, and James Tufts. Ethics. 1908. John Dewey: The Middle Works, 1899–1924, vol. 5, edited by Jo Ann Boydston. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1978.

155. ———. Ethics. 1932. John Dewey: The Later Works, 1925–1953, vol. 7, edited by Jo Ann Boydston. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1989.

156. Diriwächter, Rainer. “Völkerpsychologie.” In Oxford Handbook of Culture and Psychology, edited by Jaan Valsiner, 43–58. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.

157. Dixon, Thomas. The Invention of Altruism: Making Moral Meanings in Victorian Britain. New York: Oxford University Press, 2008.

158. Dorrien, Gary J. Social Ethics in the Making: Interpreting an American Tradition. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.

159. Dubofsky, Melvyn, and Foster Rhea Dulles. Labor in America: A History. 8th ed. Wheeling, IL: Harlan Davidson, 2010.

160. Du Bois, W. E. B. The Souls of Black Folk. 1902. Reprint, New York: Bedford, 1997.

161. Duffy, William. “Remembering Is the Remedy: Jane Addams’s Response to Conflicted Discourse.” Rhetoric Review 30 (Apr. 2011): 135–152.

162. Durst, Anne. Women Educators in the Progressive Era: The Women behind Dewey’s Laboratory School. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.

163. Edwards, R. A. R. “Jane Addams, Walter Rauschenbusch, and Dorothy Day: A Comparative Study of Settlement Theology.” In Gender and the Social Gospel, edited by Wendy J. Deichman Edwards and Carolyn De Swarte Gifford, 150–166. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2003.

164. Eliot, George. Adam Bede. 1859. Edited by Margaret Reynolds. Reprint, New York: Penguin Books, 2008.

165. ———. The Mill on the Floss. 1860. Reprint, New York: Penguin Books, 2002.

166. ———. “O May I Join the Choir Invisible.” In The Writings of George Eliot, 19:271–273. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1908.

167. ———. Review of Modern Painters, by John Ruskin, vol. 3. Westminster Review 65 (Apr. 1856): 343–347.

168. ———. Selected Critical Writings. Edited by Rosemary Ashton. New York: Oxford University Press, 1992.

169. Ellwood, Charles A. “A Psychological Theory of Revolutions.” American Journal of Sociology 11 (1905): 49–59.

170. Elshtain, Jean Bethke. Jane Addams and the Dream of American Democracy: A Life. New York: Basic Books, 2002.

171. ———. “A Return to Hull House: Reflections on Jane Addams.” Cross Currents 38 (Fall 1998): 257–267.

172. Ely, Richard T. “Constitution, By-Laws, and Resolutions of the American Economic Association.” Publications of the American Economic Association 1 (1886): 35–46.

173. ———. “Ethics and Economics.” Science 7 (1886): 529–533.

174. ———. Ground under Our Feet. New York: Macmillan, 1938.

175. ———. “Industrial Betterment.” Harper’s Monthly 105 (Sept. 1902): 548–553.

176. ———. Letter to Jane Addams. Feb. 3, 1898. JAPM 3:955.

177. ———. Letter to Jane Addams. Oct. 13, 1906. JAPM 4:1475.

178. ———. Recent American Socialism. Baltimore: John Murphy, 1885.

179. ———. Social Aspects of Christianity, and Other Essays. New York: T. Y. Crowell, 1889.

180. ———. Studies in the Evolution of Industrial Society. New York: Macmillan, 1923.

181. Emery, J. Q. “Address of Welcome.” National Educational Association, Journal of Proceedings and Addresses 36 (1897): 39–41.

182. Endersby, Jim. “Escaping Darwin’s Shadow.” Journal of the History of Biology 36 (2003): 385–403.

183. Ethical Humanist Society of Chicago Records. Special Collections, University of Illinois at Chicago. https://findingaids.library.uic.edu/sc/MSEHSC70.xml, accessed Aug. 22, 2016.

184. Figala, Karin. “Newton’s Alchemy.” In The Cambridge Companion to Newton, edited by I. Bernard Cohen and George E. Smith, 370–386. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2002.

185. Fischer, Marilyn. “‘The Moral Equivalent of War’: William James’s Minor Variation on Common Themes.” William James Studies 14 (2018): 92–113.

186. ———. “A Pluralistic Universe in Twenty Years.” Pluralist 11 (2016): 1–18.

187. Fischer, Marilyn, Carol Nackenoff, and Wendy Chmielewski. Introduction to Jane Addams and the Practice of Democracy, edited by Marilyn Fischer, Carol Nackenoff, and Wendy Chmielewski, 1–18. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009.

188. Fitzpatrick, Ellen F. Endless Crusade: Women Social Scientists and Progressive Reform. New York: Oxford University Press, 1990.

189. Flanagan, Maureen A. “The City, Still the Hope of Democracy? From Jane Addams and Mary Parker Follett to the Arab Spring.” Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 12 (Jan. 2013): 5–29.

190. Foshay, James, A. “Some Tendencies of Modern Education.” National Educational Association, Journal of Proceedings and Addresses 36 (1897): 159–162.

191. “The Founder of Hull House Spends a Day at the Factory.” NCR 11 (June 1, 1898): 282.

192. Fowler, Thomas, and John Matthias Wilson. The Principles of Morals. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1886.

193. Francis, Mark. Herbert Spencer and the Invention of Modern Life. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2007.

194. “The Function of the Social Settlement.” Ethical Record 1 (Apr. 1900): 80–82.

195. Galison, Peter. “Buildings and the Subject of Science.” In The Architecture of Science, edited by Peter Galison and Emily Ann Thompson, 1–25. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.

196. Gatens, Moira. “The Art and Philosophy of George Eliot.” Philosophy and Literature 33 (Apr. 2009): 73–90.

197. Geddes, Patrick. “Civics: As Applied Sociology I.’” Sociological Papers 1 (1904): 101–118.

198. ———. “Civics: As Applied Sociology II.” Sociological Papers 2 (1906): 55–111.

199. ———. “The Edinburgh Outlook Tower.” In Report of the Sixty-Eighth Meeting of the British Association for the Advancement of Science, Bristol, September 1898, 945–947. London: John Murray, 1899.

200. ———. “On the Conditions of Progress of the Capitalist and of the Labourer.” In The Claims of Labour: A Course of Lectures Delivered in Scotland in the Summer of 1886, on Various Aspects of the Labour Problem, edited by John Burnett, 74–111. Edinburgh: Edinburgh Co-Operative, 1886.

201. Geddes, Patrick, and J. Arthur Thomson. Sex. London: Williams and Norgate, 1914.

202. Giddings, Franklin H. “The Economic Ages.” Political Science Quarterly 16 (1901): 193–221.

203. ———. “The Ethics of Social Progress.” In Philanthropy and Social Progress, edited by Henry C. Adams, 205–248. New York: Crowell, 1893.

204. ———. “The Province of Sociology.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 1 (1890): 66–77.

205. Gillberg, Claudia. “A Methodological Interpretation of Feminist Pragmatism.” In Contemporary Feminist Pragmatism, edited by Maurice Hamington and Celia Bardwell-Jones, 217–237. New York: Routledge, 2012.

206. Gilman, Charlotte Perkins. The Living of Charlotte Perkins Gilman: An Autobiography. 1935. Reprint, New York: Arno, 1972.

207. Gizycki, G. von. “Review of Ethik.” International Journal of Ethics 1 (1890): 123–124.

208. Gonce, R. A. “The Social Gospel, Ely, and Commons’s Initial Stage of Thought.” Journal of Economic Issues 30 (1996): 641–665.

209. Gooday, Graeme. “‘Vague and Artificial’: The Historically Elusive Distinction between Pure and Applied Science.” Isis 103 (2012): 546–554.

210. Goodman, Russell B. American Philosophy and the Romantic Tradition. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990.

211. Gordon, Ann D. “Alzina Ann Parsons Stevens.” In Women Building Chicago, 1790–1990: A Biographical Dictionary, edited by Rima Lunin Schultz and Adele Hast, 842–844. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2001.

212. Gordon, Lynn D. “Education and the Professions.” In A Companion to American Women’s History, edited by Nancy A. Hewitt, 227–249. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2005.

213. Green, Judith M. “Social Democracy, Cosmopolitan Hospitality, and Intercivilizational Peace: Lessons from Jane Addams.” In Feminist Interpretations of Jane Addams, edited by Maurice Hamington, 223–253. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2010.

214. Greenwood, J. M. “The High Spirit in American Teachers.” Journal of Education 69 (1909): 118–119.

215. Gross, Matthias. “Collaborative Experiments: Jane Addams, Hull House and Experimental Social Work.” Social Science Information 48 (Mar. 2009): 81–95.

216. Guglielmo, Thomas A. White on Arrival: Italians, Race, Color, and Power in Chicago. New York: Oxford University Press, 2003.

217. Gwinn, Kristen E. Emily Greene Balch: The Long Road to Internationalism. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2010.

218. Hackett, Francis. “Hull House—a Souvenir.” 1925. Reprinted in 100 Years at Hull-House, edited by Mary Lynn McCree Bryan and Allen F. Davis, 67–73. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990.

219. Hale, Piers J. Political Descent: Malthus, Mutualism, and the Politics of Evolution in Victorian England. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014.

220. ———. “Rejecting the Myth of the Non-Darwinian Revolution.” Victorian Review 41 (2015): 13–18.

221. Hamington, Maurice. “Addams’s Radical Democracy: Moving beyond Rights.” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 18 (Jan. 2004): 216–223.

222. ———. Embodied Care: Jane Addams, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and Feminist Ethics. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004.

223. ———. The Social Philosophy of Jane Addams. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009.

224. Hamlin, Kimberly A. From Eve to Evolution: Darwin, Science, and Women’s Rights in Gilded Age America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2014.

225. Hardy, Thomas. “God’s Funeral.” In The Poetical Works of Thomas Hardy, 307–309. London: Macmillan, 1919.

226. Harkavy, Ira, and John L. Puckett. “Lessons from Hull House for the Contemporary Urban University.” Social Service Review 68 (1994): 299–321.

227. Harold, John. Farming and Railroad Interests in America. London: Cassell, Petter, Calpin, 1880.

228. Harrison, Frederic. The Meaning of History, and Other Historical Pieces. New York: Macmillan, 1894.

229. ———. “Positivism: Its Position, Aims and Ideals.” North American Review 172, no. 532 (Mar. 1901): 456–467.

230. Hawkins, Mike. Social Darwinism in European and American Thought, 1860–1945. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997.

231. Hay, Carol. “Consonances between Liberalism and Pragmatism.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 48 (2012): 141–168.

232. Hegner, Herman F. “Scientific Value of the Social Settlements.” American Journal of Sociology 3 (1897): 171–182.

233. Heldke, Lisa. “Community Gardeners or Radical Homemakers?” In Contemporary Feminist Pragmatism, edited by Maurice Hamington and Celia Bardwell-Jones, 128–142. New York: Routledge, 2012.

234. Henderson, Charles. Review of Democracy and Social Ethics, by Jane Addams. American Journal of Sociology 8 (July 1902): 136–138.

235. Henrotin, Ellen M. “The Cooperation of Woman’s Clubs in the Public Schools.” National Educational Association, Journal of Proceedings and Addresses 36 (1897): 73–83.

236. Herbst, Jurgen. The German Historical School in American Scholarship: A Study in the Transfer of Culture. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1965.

237. Herrick, Mary J. The Chicago Schools: A Social and Political History. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1971.

238. Higham, John. Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860–1925. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1992.

239. Hill, Adams Sherman. The Principles of Rhetoric. Rev. ed. New York: American Book Company, 1895.

240. Hinsley, Curtis M. “The World as Marketplace: Commodification of the Exotic at the World’s Columbian Exposition, Chicago, 1893.” In Exhibiting Cultures: The Poetics and Politics of Museum Display, edited by Ivan Karp and Steven D. Lavine, 344–365. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution, 1993.

241. Hobson, John A. Review of Democracy and Social Ethics, by Jane Addams. International Journal of Ethics 13 (1903): 375–377.

242. Hofstadter, Richard. Social Darwinism in American Thought. Boston: Beacon, 1944.

243. Hollinger, David. In the American Province: Studies in the History and Historiography of Ideas. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985.

244. Horowitz, Helen L. “Varieties of Cultural Experience in Jane Addams’ Chicago.” History of Education Quarterly 14 (1974): 69–86.

245. Houghton, Walter E. The Victorian Frame of Mind, 1830–1870. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985.

246. Hull-House Bulletin 1 (Apr. 1896). JAPM 53:529.

247. Hull-House Bulletin 1 (Oct. 15, 1896). JAPM 53:549.

248. Hull-House Bulletin 2 (Apr. 1, 1897). JAPM 53:599.

249. Hull-House Bulletin 2 (Oct. 1, 1897). JAPM 53:619.

250. Hull-House Bulletin 3 (Apr.–May 1899). JAPM 53:709.

251. Hull-House Bulletin 4 (Midwinter 1900). JAPM 53:729.

252. Hull-House Bulletin 5 (Semi-Annual 1902). JAPM 53:772.

253. Jacobson, Matthew Frye. Whiteness of a Different Color: European Immigrants and the Alchemy of Race. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998.

254. James, William. Letter to Jane Addams. Sept. 17, 1902. JAPM 4:444.

255. ———. “The Moral Equivalent of War.” 1910. In Essays in Religion and Morality, 162–173. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982.

256. ———. “Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results.” University Chronicle 1 (Sept. 1898): 287–310.

257. ———. A Pluralistic Universe. 1909. Reprint, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1977.

258. ———. Pragmatism. 1909. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1975.

259. ———. The Principles of Psychology. 2 vols. New York: Henry Holt, 1890.

260. ———. “What Makes a Life Significant.” In Talks to Teachers on Psychology and to Students on Some of Life’s Ideals, 1899, 150–167. Reprint, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1983.

261. Jernigan, E. Jay. Henry Demarest Lloyd. Boston: Twayne, 1976.

262. Jewett, Andrew. Science, Democracy, and the American University from the Civil War to the Cold War. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012.

263. Jhering, Rudolph von. Der Zweck im Recht. 2 vols. Leipzig: Breitkopf and Härtel, 1877–1883.

264. Johnson, Nan. Nineteenth-Century Rhetoric in North America. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 1991.

265. Jones, H. S. Victorian Political Thought. New York: St. Martin’s, 2000.

266. Jones, Robert Alun. “On Understanding a Sociological Classic.” American Journal of Sociology 83 (1977): 279–319.

267. Joslin, Katherine. Jane Addams: A Writer’s Life. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2004.

268. ———. “Reading Jane Addams in the Twenty-First Century.” In Feminist Interpretations of Jane Addams, edited by Maurice Hamington, 31–53. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2010.

269. Kallen, Horace. “Democracy versus the Melting-Pot.” Nation 100 (1915): 190–194, 217–220.

270. Keet, A. E. Letter to Jane Addams. Feb. 1, 1896. JAPM 3:39.

271. Keith, Heather E. “Natural Caring: A Pragmatist Feminist Approach to Ethics in the More-Than-Human World.” In Contemporary Feminist Pragmatism, edited by Maurice Hamington and Celia Bardwell-Jones, 255–268. New York: Routledge, 2012.

272. Kelley, Florence. “Hull House.” New England Magazine 18 (July 1898): 550–566.

273. ———. “The Sweating-System.” 1895. In Hull-House Maps and Papers, by residents of Hull-House, edited by Rima Lunin Schultz, 63–72. Reprint, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2007.

274. Kellogg, Vernon. Darwinism Today. New York: Henry Holt, 1907.

275. Kidd, Benjamin. Social Evolution. New York: Macmillan, 1894.

276. King, Henry Churchill. “Reconstruction in Theology.” American Journal of Theology 3 (1899): 295–323.

277. Kirkup, Thomas. A History of Socialism. London: Adam and Charles Black, 1892.

278. Klautke, Egbert. The Mind of the Nation: Völkerpsychologie in Germany, 1851–1955. New York: Berghahn, 2013.

279. Kloppenberg, James T. “Thinking Historically: A Manifesto of Pragmatic Hermeneutics.” Modern Intellectual History 9 (2012): 201–216.

280. Knight, Louise W. Citizen: Jane Addams and the Struggle for Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005.

281. ———. Jane Addams: Spirit in Action. New York: W. W. Norton, 2010.

282. ———. “Jane Addams’s Theory of Cooperation.” In Jane Addams and the Practice of Democracy, edited by Marilyn Fischer, Carol Nackenoff, and Wendy Chmielewski, 65–86. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009.

283. Kraut, Benny. From Reform Judaism to Ethical Culture: The Religious Evolution of Felix Adler. Cincinnati: Hebrew Union College Press, 1979.

284. Kuhn, Thomas. The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977.

285. Kuklick, Henrika. “Personal Equations: Reflections on the History of Fieldwork, with Special Reference to Sociocultural Anthropology.” Isis 102 (2011): 1–33.

286. “Labor Differences Settled.” NCR 15 (Mar. 15, 1902): 183.

287. Lane, Albert G. “Address of Welcome.” National Educational Association, Journal of Proceedings and Addresses 36 (1897): 49–50.

288. Lane, Christopher. The Age of Doubt: Tracing the Roots of Our Religious Uncertainty. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2011.

289. Lankester, E. Ray. Degeneration: A Chapter in Darwinism. London: Macmillan, 1880.

290. Lears, T. J. Jackson. No Place of Grace: Anti-modernism and the Transformation of American Culture, 1880–1920. New York: Pantheon Books, 1981.

291. Leaton, W. “Self-Sustaining Motive Power.” English Mechanic and Mirror of Science 3 (Aug. 10, 1866): 431.

292. Lecky, William Edward Hartpole. The Map of Life, Conduct, and Character. New York: Longmans, Green, 1899.

293. Le Conte, Joseph. “A Note on the Religious Significance of Science.” Monist 10 (Jan. 1900): 161–166.

294. ———. “Scientific Relation of Sociology to Biology II.” Popular Science Monthly 14 (Feb. 1879): 425–434.

295. ———. “The Theory of Evolution and Social Progress.” Monist 5 (July 1895): 481–500.

296. Levine, Daniel. Jane Addams and the Liberal Tradition. Madison: State Historical Society of Wisconsin, 1971.

297. Levine, Donald N. “The Organism Metaphor in Sociology.” Social Research 62 (1995): 239–265.

298. Leyendecker, Liston Edgington. Palace Car Prince: A Biography of George Mortimer Pullman. Niwot: University Press of Colorado, 1992.

299. Lightman, Bernard. Introduction to Victorian Science in Context, edited by Bernard Lightman, 1–12. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1997.

300. ———. “Life.” In Historicism and the Human Sciences in Victorian Britain, edited by Mark Bevir, 21–47. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

301. ———. Victorian Popularizers of Science: Design Nature for New Audiences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007.

302. Lindley, Susan H. “‘Neglected Voices’ and ‘Praxis’ in the Social Gospel.” Journal of Religious Ethics 18 (1990): 75–102.

303. Linn, James Weber. Jane Addams: A Biography. 1935. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2000.

304. Lowell, James Russell. “Ode to France.” In Poems, by James Russell Lowell, 5th ed., 2:211–220. Boston: Ticknor, Reed, and Fields, 1853.

305. Lucier, Paul. “The Origins of Pure and Applied Science in Gilded Age America.” Isis 103 (2012): 527–536.

306. Luther, Jessie. “The Labor Museum at Hull House.” Commons 7 (May 1902): 1–13.

307. MacDonald, J. Ramsey. “The People in Power.” In Ethical Democracy: Essays in Social Dynamics, edited by Stanton Coit, 60–80. London: Grant Richards, 1900.

308. Marsden, Ben. Introduction to Uncommon Contexts: Encounters between Science and Literature, 1800–1914, edited by Ben Marsden, Hazel Hutchison, and Ralph O’Connor, 1–19. London: Pickering and Chatto, 2013.

309. Marshall, Douglas A. “Sociology’s Contentious Courtship with Biology: A Ballad.” In Oxford Handbook of Evolution, Biology, and Society. edited by Rosemary L. Hopcroft, 33–62. New York: Oxford University Press, 2018.

310. Marshall, Henry Rutgers. War and the Ideal of Peace: A Study of Those Characteristics of Man That Result in War, and of the Means by Which They May Be Controlled. New York: Duffield, 1915.

311. Marshall, Margaret J. Contesting Cultural Rhetorics: Public Discourse and Education, 1890–1900. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1995.

312. Maude, Aylmer. Review of Democracy and Social Ethics, by Jane Addams. Whim, Dec. 1902, 158–162. JAPM 82:195.

313. Mayhew, Katherine Camp, and Anna Camp Edwards. The Dewey School: The Laboratory School of the University of Chicago, 1896–1903. New York: D. Appleton-Century, 1936.

314. Mazzini, Joseph. The Duties of Man. London: Chapman and Hall, 1862.

315. ———. “Thoughts on Democracy in Europe.” 1847. In Joseph Mazzini: A Memoir, with Two Essays by Mazzini, by E. A. Venturi and Joseph Mazzini, 171–258. London: Henry S. King, 1877.

316. ———. “Young Europe.” In Joseph Mazzini: His Life, Writings, and Political Principles, by Giuseppe Mazzini, 151–191. New York: Hurd and Houghton, 1872.

317. McDougall, William. An Introduction to Social Psychology. Boston: J. W. Luce, 1909.

318. McGranahan, Lucas. Darwinism and Pragmatism: William James on Evolution and Self-Transformation. New York: Routledge, 2017.

319. Meacham, Standish. Toynbee Hall and Social Reform, 1880–1914: The Search for Community. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987.

320. Mead, George Herbert, and Merritt Hadden Moore. Movements of Thought in the Nineteenth Century. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1936.

321. “Meeting of Convocation.” British Medical Journal 1 (1895): 222–223.

322. Meller, Helen E. Patrick Geddes: Social Evolutionist and City Planner. New York: Routledge, 1990.

323. Menand, Louis. The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2001.

324. Menn, Stephen Philip. Descartes and Augustine. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1998.

325. Merriner, James L. Grafters and Goo Goos: Corruption and Reform in Chicago, 1833–2003. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2004.

326. Merwin, Henry Childs. “The Irish in American Life.” Atlantic Monthly 77 (Mar. 1896): 289–301.

327. Miller, Donald L. City of the Century: The Epic of Chicago and the Making of America. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996.

328. Milton, John. Areopagitica. Oxford: Clarendon, 1894.

329. “Miss Jane Addams.” Scarlet and Black, Iowa College, Grinnell, Iowa, 4 (March 2, 1899):1.

330. “Miss Jane Addams.” Scarlet and Black, Iowa College, Grinnell, Iowa, 4 (March 10, 1899):1, 4.

331. “Miss Jane Addams of Hull House Talks to Philadelphia People of Lake City Ethics.” Chicago Daily Tribune, Dec. 13, 1897, 3.

332. Moore, Dorothea. “A Day at Hull House.” American Journal of Sociology (1897): 629–642.

333. Morley, John. On Compromise. London: Chapman and Hall, 1874.

334. ———. Recollections. Vol. 1. New York: Macmillan, 1917.

335. Morris, William. A Dream of John Ball. London: Reeves and Turner, 1888.

336. ———. Hopes and Fears for Art. London: Ellis and White, 1882.

337. ———. Signs of Change: Seven Lectures Delivered on Various Occasions. London: Reeves and Turner, 1888.

338. Murdach, Allison D. “Situational Approaches to Direct Practice: Origin, Decline, and Re-emergence.” Social Work 52 (2007): 211–218.

339. Nackenoff, Carol. “New Politics for New Selves: Jane Addams’s Legacy for Democratic Citizenship in the Twenty-First Century.” In Jane Addams and the Practice of Democracy, edited by Marilyn Fischer, Carol Nackenoff, and Wendy Chmielewski, 119–142. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009.

340. National Leaders Council. “Ethical Culture as a Humanist Movement: A Concept Map.” Religious Humanism 34 (Summer–Fall 2000): 91–106.

341. Nelli, Humbert S. “The Italian Padrone System in the United States.” Labor History 5 (1964): 153–167.

342. ———. “John Powers and the Italians: Politics in a Chicago Ward, 1896–1921.” Journal of American History 57 (1970): 67–84.

343. Newman, John Henry. Discussions and Arguments on Various Subjects. London: Pickering, 1878.

344. Newman, William. “The Background to Newton’s Chymistry.” In The Cambridge Companion to Newton, edited by I. Bernard Cohen and George E. Smith, 358–369. New York: Cambridge University Press. 2002.

345. Newton, K. M. George Eliot, Romantic Humanist: A Study of the Philosophical Structure of Her Novels. Totowa, NJ: Barnes and Noble Books, 1981.

346. Noblitt, Julia E. “Josefa Veronika Humpal-Zeman.” In Women Building Chicago, 1790–1990: A Biographical Dictionary, edited by Rima Lunin Schultz and Adele Hast, 417–420. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2001.

347. Nungesser, Frithjof. “The Evolution of Pragmatism.” European Journal of Sociology 58 (2017): 327–367.

348. Nutter, Kathleen Banks. “Mary Kenney O’Sullivan.” In Women Building Chicago, 1790–1990: A Biographical Dictionary, edited by Rima Lunin Schultz and Adele Hast, 650–653. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2001.

349. Oettingen, Alexander von. Die Moralstatistik und die christliche Sittenlehre, Versuch einer Socialethik. Erlangen: A. Deichert, 1874.

350. Offer, John. Herbert Spencer and Social Theory. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.

351. ———. “A New Reading of Spencer on ‘Society,’ ‘Organicism,’ and ‘Spontaneous Order.’” Journal of Classical Sociology 15 (2015): 337–360.

352. Pacyga, Dominic A. Chicago: A Biography. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2009.

353. Pappas, Gregory F. John Dewey’s Ethics: Democracy as Experience. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2008.

354. Pater, Walter. Appreciations, with an Essay on Style. New York: Macmillan, 1890.

355. ———. Marius the Epicurean, His Sensations and Ideas. 2 vols. London: Macmillan. 1885.

356. Pearce, Trevor. “Pragmatism’s Evolution: Organism and Environment in American Philosophy.” Unpublished manuscript.

357. Pearson, Karl. “Mathematical Contributions to the Theory of Evolution. V. On the Reconstruction of the Stature of Prehistoric Races.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical or Physical Character 192 (1899): 169–244.

358. Pease, Edward R. Preface to History of Socialism, by Thomas Kirkup. 5th ed, v–ix. London: A. and C. Black, 1913.

359. Peirce, Charles S. “Evolutionary Love.” Monist 3 (Jan. 1893): 176–200.

360. ———. “The Fixation of Belief.” In Charles S. Peirce: Selected Writings, edited by Philip P. Wiener, 113–136. New York: Dover, 1958.

361. ———. “How to Make Our Ideas Clear.” In Charles S. Peirce: Selected Writings, edited by Philip P. Wiener, 91–112. New York: Dover, 1958.

362. Peterson, Paul E. The Politics of School Reform: 1870–1940. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985.

363. Phelps, Elizabeth Stuart. “Women’s Views of Divorce.” North American Review 150 (Jan. 1890): 128–131.

364. Phillips, Paul T. A Kingdom on Earth: Anglo-American Social Christianity, 1880–1940. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1996.

365. Philpott, Thomas Lee. The Slum and the Ghetto: Immigrants, Blacks, and Reformers in Chicago, 1880–1930. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1991.

366. Polacheck, Hilda Satt, and Dena J. Polacheck Epstein. I Came a Stranger: The Story of a Hull-House Girl. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1989.

367. Pollock, Frederick. Oxford Lectures and Other Discourses. London: Macmillan, 1890.

368. Pond, Allen B. “The ‘Settlement House’ Part 1.” Brickbuilder 11 (July 1902): 140–145.

369. ———. “The ‘Settlement House’ Part 3.” Brickbuilder 11 (Sept. 1902): 178–185.

370. Porter, Theodore M. “The Social Sciences.” In From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences: Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science, edited by David Cahan, 254–290. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.

371. “Powers in a Focus: Jane Addams on Ethics and Municipal Corruption.” Chicago Daily Tribune, Jan. 24, 1898, 9.

372. “Powers on the Griddle: Jane Addams Roasts the Alderman to a Turn.” Chicago Daily Tribune, Jan. 21, 1898, 1.

373. “Proceedings of the November Meeting.” Bulletin of the Academy (American Academy of Political and Social Science), new series, 9 (Apr. 18, 1899): 79–81.

374. Pyle, Forest. “A Novel Sympathy: The Imagination of Community in George Eliot.” Novel: A Forum on Fiction 27 (1993): 5–23.

375. Radest, Howard B. Felix Adler: An Ethical Culture. New York: Peter Lang, 1998.

376. ———. Toward Common Ground: The Story of the Ethical Societies in the United States. New York: Frederick Ungar, 1969.

377. Rauschenbusch, Walter. Letter to Jane Addams. Feb. 24, 1910. JAPM 5:1044.

378. “The Reconstruction of History.” Advocate of Peace (1894–1920) 56 (1894): 36–37.

379. Reed, Christopher R. Black Chicago’s First Century. Columbia: University of Missouri Press, 2005.

380. Renwick, Chris. British Sociology’s Lost Biological Roots: A History of Futures Past. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012.

381. “Re-Opening of the N.C.R. House.” NCR 15 (Oct. 1, 1902): 759.

382. Residents of Hull-House. Hull-House Maps and Papers. 1895. Edited by Rima Lunin Schultz. Reprint, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2007.

383. Richards, Robert J. “Biology.” In From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences: Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science, edited by David Cahan, 16–48. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.

384. ———. Darwin and the Emergence of Evolutionary Theories of Mind and Behavior. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987.

385. ———. The Meaning of Evolution: The Morphological Construction and Ideological Reconstruction of Darwin’s Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.

386. ———. The Romantic Conception of Life: Science and Philosophy in the Age of Goethe. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002.

387. Richmond, Mary E. Friendly Visiting among the Poor; A Handbook for Charity Workers. New York: Macmillan, 1899.

388. ———. The Good Neighbor in the Modern City. Philadelphia: J. P. Lippincott, 1907.

389. Rieff, Janice L. “A Modern Lear and His Daughters: Gender in the Model Town of Pullman.” In The Pullman Strike and the Crisis of the 1890s: Essays on Labor and Politics, edited by Richard Schneirov, Shelton Stromquist, and Nick Salvatore, 65–86. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992.

390. Roberts, Sidney I. “Portrait of a Robber Baron: Charles T. Yerkes.” Business History Review 35 (Fall 1961): 344–371.

391. Rodgers, Daniel T. Atlantic Crossings: Social Politics in a Progressive Age. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1998.

392. ———. The Work Ethic in Industrial America, 1850–1920. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1978.

393. Rosenberg, Rosalind. Beyond Separate Spheres: Intellectual Roots of Modern Feminism. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1982.

394. Rosiek, Jerry Lee, and Scott Pratt. “Jane Addams as a Resource for Developing a Reflexively Realist Social Science Practice.” Qualitative Inquiry 19 (Oct. 2013): 578–588.

395. Ross, Dorothy. The Origins of American Social Science. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1991.

396. Ross, Edward A. The Old World in the New: The Significance of Past and Present Immigration to the American People. New York: Century, 1914.

397. Royce, Josiah. “Provincialism.” 1902. In Race Questions, Provincialism, and Other American Problems, edited by Scott L. Pratt and Shannon Sullivan, 69–92. New York: Fordham University Press, 2009.

398. ———. “Some Characteristic Tendencies of American Civilization.” 1900. In Race Questions, Provincialism, and Other American Problems, edited by Scott L. Pratt and Shannon Sullivan, 223–248. New York: Fordham University Press, 2009.

399. ———. The Spirit of Modern Philosophy: An Essay in the Form of Lectures. 1892. Reprint, New York: Dover, 1983.

400. Ruskin, John. Lectures on Art. New York, 1870.

401. ———. Stones of Venice. 3 vols. New York: Merrill and Baker, 1851–1853.

402. Salter, William M. Letter to Jane Addams. Jan. 23, 1898. JAPM 3:949.

403. Sanders, James W. The Education of an Urban Minority: Catholics in Chicago. New York: Oxford University Press, 1977.

404. Sarvasy, Wendy. “Engendering Democracy by Socializing It: Jane Addams’s Contribution to Feminist Political Theorizing.” In Feminist Interpretations of Jane Addams, edited by Maurice Hamington, 293–310. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2010.

405. ———. “A Global ‘Common Table’: Jane Addams’s Theory of Democratic Cosmopolitanism and World Social Citizenship.” In Jane Addams and the Practice of Democracy, edited by Marilyn Fischer, Carol Nackenoff, and Wendy Chmielewski, 183–202. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009.

406. Schaafsma, David, ed. Jane Addams in the Classroom. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2014.

407. Schäfer, Axel R. American Progressives and German Social Reform, 1875–1920: Social Ethics, Moral Control, and the Regulatory State in a Transatlantic Context. Stuttgart: F. Steiner Verlag, 2000.

408. Schneider, Herbert W. A History of American Philosophy. New York: Liberal Arts, 1946.

409. Schneiderhan, Erik. “Pragmatism and Empirical Sociology: The Case of Jane Addams and Hull-House, 1889–1895.” Theory & Society 40 (Nov. 2011): 589–617.

410. Schneirov, Richard. “The Knights of Labor in the Haymarket Era.” In Haymarket Scrapbook, edited by David Roediger and Franklin Rosemont, 81–83. Chicago: Charles H. Kerr, 1986.

411. Schneirov, Richard, Shelton Stromquist, and Nick Salvatore. Introduction to The Pullman Strike and the Crisis of the 1890s: Essays on Labor and Politics, edited by Richard Schneirov, Shelton Stromquist, and Nick Salvatore, 1–19. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1992.

412. Schultz, Rima Lunin. “The Arts and Crafts Movement in England and the United States.” Urban Experience in Chicago: Hull House and Its Neighborhood, 1889–1963. 2003. http://hullhouse.uic.edu/hull/urbanexp/main.cgi?file=new/subsub_index.ptt&chap=63.

413. ———. “Jane Addams, Apotheosis of Social Christianity.” Church History 84 (Mar. 2015): 207–219.

414. ———. Introduction to Hull-House Maps and Papers, by Residents of Hull-House, 1895, 1–42. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2007.

415. ———. Introduction to Women Building Chicago, 1790–1990: A Biographical Dictionary, edited by Rima Lunin Schultz and Adele Hast, xix–lx. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2001.

416. Schuster, David. G. “Neurasthenia and a Modernizing America.” Journal of the American Medical Association 290 (Nov. 2003): 2327–2328.

417. Schuyler, Eugene. “Italian Immigration into the United States.” Political Science Quarterly 4 (1889): 480–495.

418. Scott, John. “The Social Theory of Patrick Geddes.” Journal of Classical Sociology 16 (2016): 237–260.

419. Scott, John, and Ray Bromley. Envisioning Sociology: Victor Branford, Patrick Geddes, and the Quest for Social Reconstruction. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2013.

420. Scudder, Horace E. Letter to Mary Hawes Wilmarth. Apr. 18, 1896. JAPM 3:104.

421. Sealander, Judith. Grand Plans: Business Progressivism and Social Change in Ohio’s Miami Valley, 1890–1929. Lexington: University Press of Kentucky, 1988.

422. “Section of Public Medicine.” British Medical Journal 2 (1888): 407–420.

423. Seigfried, Charlene Haddock. “Democracy as a Way of Life: Addams’s Pragmatist Influence on Dewey.” Unpublished manuscript. Presented at the Society for the Advancement of American Philosophy annual conference, Spokane, WA, Mar. 12, 2011.

424. ———. Introduction to “Feminism and the Writings of American Women.” In Pragmatism and Classical American Philosophy: Essential Readings and Interpretive Essays, 2nd ed., edited by John J. Stuhr, 625–631. New York: Oxford University Press, 2000.

425. ———. Introduction to the Illinois Edition of Democracy and Social Ethics, by Jane Addams, ix–xxxviii. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2002.

426. ______. Introduction to the Illinois Edition of The Long Road of Woman’s Memory, by Jane Addams. ix–xxxiv. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2002.

427. ———. Pragmatism and Feminism: Reweaving the Social Fabric. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996.

428. ———. “The Social Self in Jane Addams’s Prefaces and Introductions.” Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 49 (Mar. 1, 2013): 127–156.

429. Seligman, Edwin R. A. Letter to Jane Addams. Apr. 26, 1902. JAPM 4:373.

430. Shaw, Albert. Letter to Jane Addams. Jan. 18, 1896. JAPM 3:27.

431. Shaw, George Bernard. “The Illusions of Socialism.” In Hand and Brain: A Symposium of Essays on Socialism, by William Morris et al., 87–119. Aurora, NY: Roycroft Shop, 1898.

432. Shelley, Percy Bysshe. “Adonais.” In The Complete Poetical Works of Percy Bysshe Shelley, 423–433. New York: Crowell, 1900.

433. _____. A Defense of Poetry. Boston: Ginn, 1891.

434. Shuttleworth, Sally. George Eliot and Nineteenth-Century Science: The Make-Believe of a Beginning. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984.

435. Sklar, Kathryn Kish. Florence Kelley and the Nation’s Work. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995.

436. Skinner, Charles R. “The Best Education for the Masses.” National Educational Association, Journal of Proceedings and Addresses 36 (1897): 51–58.

437. Small, Albion W. Adam Smith and Modern Sociology; A Study in the Methodology of the Social Sciences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1907.

438. ———. “The Organic Concept of Society.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 5 (Mar. 1895): 88–94.

439. ———. “Scholarship and Social Agitation.” American Journal of Sociology 1 (1896): 564–582.

440. ———. The Significance of Sociology for Ethics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1902.

441. ———. “Static and Dynamic Sociology.” American Journal of Sociology 1 (1895): 195–209.

442. Small, Albion W., and George E. Vincent. An Introduction to the Study of Society. New York: American Book, 1894.

443. Snyder, Thomas D., ed. 120 Years of American Education: A Statistical Portrait. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, 1993.

444. Spencer, Herbert. First Principles of a New System of Philosophy. New York: D. Appleton, 1864.

445. ———. Principles of Psychology. 2 vols. New York: D. Appleton, 1885.

446. ———. Principles of Sociology. 2 vols. New York: D. Appleton, 1881.

447. ———. “The Social Organism.” Westminster Review 73 (Jan. 1860): 51–68.

448. Stivers, Camilla. “A Civic Machinery for Democratic Expression: Jane Addams on Public Administration.” In Jane Addams and the Practice of Democracy, edited by Marilyn Fischer, Carol Nackenoff, and Wendy Chmielewski, 87–97. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009.

449. Stocking, George W., Jr. “Essays on Museums and Material Culture.” Objects and Others: Essays on Museums and Material Culture, edited by George W. Stocking Jr., 3–14. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1985.

450. ———. Race, Culture, and Evolution: Essays in the History of Anthropology. New York: Free Press, 1968.

451. Stout, G. F. “The Genesis of the Cognition of Physical Reality.” Mind 15 (1890): 22–45.

452. Sturtevant, William C. “Does Anthropology Need Museums?” Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington 82 (1969): 619–650.

453. Sullivan, Shannon. Revealing Whiteness: The Unconscious Habits of Racial Privilege. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2006.

454. Takaki, Ronald T. A Different Mirror: A History of Multicultural America. 1st rev. ed. New York: Back Bay Books / Little, Brown, 2008.

455. Taylor, Bob Pepperman. Citizenship and Democratic Doubt: The Legacy of Progressive Thought. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 2004.

456. Tolstoy, Leo. What Is Art? London: W. Scott, 1899.

457. ———. What to Do? Thoughts Evoked by the Census of Moscow. New York: T. Y. Crowell, 1888.

458. Toynbee, Arnold. “Industry and Democracy.” In Lectures on the Industrial Revolution of the 18th Century in England; Popular Addresses, Notes and Other Fragments, 178–202. London: Rivingtons, 1884.

459. ———. Lectures on the Industrial Revolution of the 18th Century in England; Popular Addresses, Notes and Other Fragments. London: Rivingtons, 1884.

460. ———. “Notes and Jottings.” In Lectures on the Industrial Revolution of the 18th Century in England; Popular Addresses, Notes and Other Fragments, 241–256. London: Rivingtons, 1884.

461. Tracy, Lena Harvey. How My Heart Sang: The Story of Pioneer Industrial Welfare Work. New York: Richard R. Smith, 1950.

462. Triggs, Oscar Lovell. Chapters in the History of the Arts and Crafts Movement. Chicago: Bohemia Guild of the Industrial Art League, 1902.

463. “Trip of N.C.R. Century Club Delegates.” NCR 15 (June 15, 1902): 384.

464. Tylor, Edward B. Primitive Culture: Researches into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Language, Art and Custom. Boston: Estes and Lauriat, 1874.

465. Vallance, Zona. Review of Democracy and Social Ethics, by Jane Addams. Ethics, July 5, 1902. JAPM 82:71.

466. Vapnek, Lara. Breadwinners: Working Women and Economic Independence, 1865–1920. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2009.

467. Veblen, Thorstein B. “Arts and Crafts.” Journal of Political Economy 11 (Dec. 1902): 108–111.

468. Vecoli, Rudolph J. “Prelates and Peasants: Italian Immigrants and the Catholic Church.” Journal of Social History 2 (1969): 217–268.

469. Vincent, George E. “The Province of Sociology.” American Journal of Sociology 1 (1896): 473–491.

470. Violas, Paul. “Jane Addams and the New Liberalism.” In Roots of Crisis: American Education in the Twentieth Century, edited by Clarence J. Karier, Paul Violas, and Joel Spring, 66–83. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1973.

471. Walker, Francis A. “Restriction of Immigration.” Atlantic Monthly 77 (June 1896): 822–829.

472. Wallas, Graham. Human Nature in Politics. London: Archibald Constable, 1908.

473. ———. Letter to Jane Addams. May 14, 1915. JAPM 8:949.

474. Ward, Lester F. “Contributions to Social Philosophy. XII. Collective Telesis.” American Journal of Sociology 2 (May 1897): 801–822.

475. ———. “Static and Dynamic Sociology.” Political Science Quarterly 10 (1895): 203–220.

476. Warner, Amos G. American Charities; A Study in Philanthropy and Economics. New York: T. Y. Crowell, 1894.

477. _____. “Politics and Crime.” American Journal of Sociology 3 (Nov. 1895): 290–298.

478. Washburne, Marion Foster. “A Labor Museum.” 1904. In 100 Years at Hull-House, edited by Mary Lynn McCree Bryan and Allen Freeman Davis, 74–81. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990.

479. Webb, Beatrice Potter. My Apprenticeship. London: Longmans, Green, 1926.

480. Webb, Sidney. English Progress towards Social Democracy. London: Fabian Society, 1890.

481. ———. “Historic.” In Fabian Essays in Socialism, edited by G. Bernard Shaw, 30–61. London: Fabian Society, 1889.

482. ———. Letter to Jane Addams. June 13, 1896. JAPM 3:289.

483. ———. Socialism in England. 2nd ed. London: S. Sonnenschein, 1893.

484. Westbrook, Robert B. Democratic Hope: Pragmatism and the Politics of Truth. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2005.

485. ———. John Dewey and American Democracy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1991.

486. Whipps, Judy D. “Examining Addams’s Democratic Theory through a Postcolonial Feminist Lens.” In Feminist Interpretations of Jane Addams, edited by Maurice Hamington, 275–292. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 2010.

487. ———. “Jane Addams’s Social Thought as a Model for a Pragmatist-Feminist Communitarianism.” Hypatia 19 (2004): 118–133.

488. ———. “‘Learn to Earn’: A Pragmatist Response to Contemporary Dialogues about Industrial Education.” Journal of Speculative Philosophy 22 (2008): 59–67.

489. Wickberg, Daniel. “What Is the History of Sensibilities? On Cultural Histories, Old and New.” American Historical Review 112 (June 2007): 661–684.

490. Wiener, Philip. Evolution and the Founders of Pragmatism. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1949.

491. Wilder, H. M. “Cystitis.” Medicus 10 (Apr. 1902): 109–114.

492. Wilkinson, Iain. “On the Task of Making Social Inquiry Aligned to Caregiving: An Invitation to Debate.” Anthropology & Medicine 21 (Apr. 2014): 87–99.

493. Williams, Raymond. Keywords: a Vocabulary of Culture and Society. New York: Oxford University Press, 1983.

494. Wilson, A. N. God’s Funeral. New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.

495. Wiltse, Sara. “A Preliminary Sketch of the History of Child Study in America.” Pedagogical Seminary 3 (Oct. 1895): 189–212.

496. Winkelman, Joel. “A Working Democracy: Jane Addams on the Meaning of Work.” Review of Politics 75 (June 1, 2013): 357–382.

497. “Woman’s Club Celebrates Tolstoi Day in Studebaker Hall.” Inter-Ocean, Oct. 6, 1898. JAPM: 55:454.

498. Woods, Robert A. “The Neighborhood in Social Reconstruction.” American Journal of Sociology 19 (1914): 577–591.

499. ———. “The University Settlement Idea.” In Philanthropy and Social Progress, edited by Henry C. Adams, 57–97. New York: Crowell, 1893.

500. Wordsworth, William. “The Idiot Boy.” In The Complete Poetical Works of William Wordsworth. 110–115. New York: Crowell, 1888.

501. ———. “Ode on Intimations of Immortality.” In The Complete Poetical Works of William Wordsworth. 403-407. New York: Crowell, 1888.

502. Wright, Frank Lloyd. “The Art and Craft of the Machine.” 1901. In 100 Years at Hull-House, edited by Mary Lynn McCree Bryan and Allen Freeman Davis, 86–92. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1990.

503. Wright, T. R. The Religion of Humanity: The Impact of Comtean Positivism on Victorian Britain. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1986.

504. Wulf, Andrea. The Invention of Nature: Alexander von Humboldt’s New World. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2015.

505. Wundt, Wilhelm. Ethics: An Investigation of the Facts and Laws of the Moral Life. 3 vols. Translated by Edward Bradford Titchener, Julia Henrietta Gulliver, and Margaret Floy Washburn. New York: Macmillan, 1897–1901.

506. Young, Brian. “History.” In Historicism and the Human Sciences in Victorian Britain, edited by Mark Bevir, 154–185. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2017.

507. Young, Robert M. Darwin’s Metaphor: Nature’s Place in Victorian Culture. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985.

508. Zueblin, Charles. “The World’s First Sociological Laboratory.” American Journal of Sociology 4 (Mar. 1899): 577–592.

Index

Page numbers in italics refer to figures.

Abbott, Andrew, 164

Adams, Henry Carter, 25, 26, 28, 38, 170

Addams, Jane: conception of social democracy, 21–22, 28–32, 111, 122–23, 153–54, 166, 167–68, 169–70, 188–89; psychological analyses by, 27, 67–68, 69, 73, 82–86, 89, 92–95, 113–19, 171–72; scholarship on, 3–5, 9, 10, 20, 35–36, 80, 88–89, 90, 145–46, 148–49, 155–56, 165, 173, 176, 183–84, 187–88; as a scientist, 18, 19, 120–21, 147, 148–55, 186. See also democracy; individual ethics; social ethics

Addams, Jane, method of ethical deliberation, 1, 9–10, 15–18, 42–43, 48, 52–53, 59, 67–68, 76, 77, 91, 96–99, 100–101, 111–12, 117–19, 124–25, 147–48; and morally troubling situations, 15–16, 56–57, 94, 97–99, 100, 117–19; and sympathy as methodological, 39, 40, 55, 65, 120–21. See also growth: organic; perplexities; reconciliation

Addams, Jane, rhetoric and writing style, 1, 10, 35, 69–70, 121, 146, 150, 155–64, 186–87; to change sensibilities, 10–13, 65, 137–38, 163; documentation practices, 12, 13–14, 36, 51, 55, 74, 85, 105, 142, 150; to evoke sympathy, 10–11, 55–56, 60, 65, 163–64; purposes for writing, 10–11, 15–16, 121, 176, 186; as synthesizing, 12–13, 16, 20–21, 39, 40–41, 45, 65, 143, 165–66

Addams, Jane, works: “Domestic Service and the Family Claim,” 70–71; “First Report of the Labor Museum at Hull House,” 173; “Growth of Corporate Consciousness,” 159, 175–76; The Long Road of Woman’s Memory, 104; “A Modern Lear,” 80, 88; Newer Ideals of Peace, 14, 98, 168; “The Objective Value of a Social Settlement,” 23, 25, 26, 68; “The Object of Social Settlements,” 46; “Outgrowths of Toynbee Hall,” 29, 30, 32, 33, 36; “Program of Lectures: Democracy and Social Ethics,” 71, 82, 113, 120, 169, 171; The Second Twenty Years at Hull-House, 12; Twenty Years at Hull-House, 1, 12, 17, 82, 90, 120, 132, 155, 175. See also “Belated Industry, A” (Addams); “College Woman and the Family Claim, The” (Addams); Democracy and Social Ethics (Addams); “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption” (Addams); “First Outline of a Labor Museum at Hull-House, Chicago” (Addams); “Foreign-Born Children in the Primary Grades” (Addams); “Function of the Social Settlement, A” (Addams); “Modern Tragedy, A” (Addams); “Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement, The” (Addams); “Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements, The” (Addams); “Subtle Problems of Charity, The” (Addams)

Adler, Felix, 25, 38–39, 173

Altgeld, John Peter, 45

American Academy of Political and Social Science, 147, 154, 163

American Economic Association, 154, 171, 173

American Federation of Labor (AFL), 43

American Journal of Sociology, 70, 121, 164

American Railway Union, 78

Anglo-Saxons, 52, 106, 119–20, 136–37, 166; as prejudiced against immigrants, 11, 65, 98, 104–5, 119–20, 126

antagonism, 33, 88; between classes, 50, 54, 59–60, 89; and harm to social organism, 51–52, 60, 62, 88–90

anthropology, 100, 104–9, 135, 154. See also Wundt, Wilhelm

arbitration, 78, 83–84, 88, 89

art: function of, 163–64, 186; industrialization and, 140–42; Romanticist conception of, 156–57; Tolstoy on, 157–60. See also literature

Arts and Crafts movement, 140–42

association, 2, 14–15; concept of, 69, 74–75, 144; and democracy, 69, 74, 144, 146, 153, 159; evolutionary movement toward, 51, 67, 69, 70, 73–77, 84–89, 91, 93, 95, 98, 99, 101, 110, 121, 145. See also fellowship; Kirkup, Thomas; Mazzini, Giuseppe; Toynbee, Arnold; Webb, Sidney

Atlantic Monthly, 60, 78, 83, 112, 121

Babeuf, François-Noël, 82

Bain, Alexander, 10, 58

Baker, Ray Stannard, 102, 104–5, 111

Balch, Emily Greene, 170

Ball, Sidney, 168

Barnett, Henrietta, 24

Barnett, Samuel, 23, 24, 33

Beer, Gillian, Darwin’s Plots, 62, 64

“Belated Industry, A” (Addams), 67, 86, 92, 95, 176–77; and evolutionary movement toward association, 74–76; geographical axis of, 70–72; historical axis of, 72–75; and instinctual need for fellowship, 73–77

Berger, Victor, 51

Bernard, Claude, 55

Besant, Walter, The Children of Gibeon, 33

Bible, King James, 14, 173

Boas, Franz, 136, 217n86; The Mind of Primitive Man, 122

Booth, Charles, 68

Bourne, Randolph, 122

Brickbuilder (Architectural Forum), 138

Brinton, Daniel, 154, 165

Brown, Victoria Bissell, 3

Bud, Robert, 149

Butler, Lance St. John, 55

Caird, Edward, 120–22; The Evolution of Religion, 120

capitalism (laissez faire or political economy), 6, 47, 78, 83, 151, 170, 171, 172, 178; Addams’s critique of, 50–53, 57–58, 83–85, 89, 98–99, 142–43, 144–46; Fabian socialist critique of, 81, 84–85, 89; Tolstoy’s critique of, 160

Carlyle, Thomas, 76

Cartelli, Thomas, 80, 206n36

“Charitable Effort” (Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams), 180–81. See also “Subtle Problems of Charity, The” (Addams)

Charities, 45

charity, 117–19, 172. See also Charity Organization Society

Charity Organization Society, 112–14, 116–19; Addams’s critique of, 101, 117–19; and evolution of science, 116–17, 180

charity visitor, 113–16, 153, 168, 174, 180–81, 184

Chautauqua, 151, 169

Chicago, 24–26, 125–26. See also Hull House: and neighborhood conditions; labor union movement

Chicago Art Institute, 141

Chicago Bureau of Charities, 113

Chicago Civic Federation, 78

Chicago Commons, 152

Chicago Manual Training School, 129

Chicago Woman’s Club, 30, 92, 163

Chicago Working Women’s Council, 43

Chicago World’s Fair. See World’s Columbian Exposition of 1893 (Chicago)

Child Study movement, 129

Christianity, 35–39, 172–73

civilization, 29, 32, 51, 135, 145, 151, 159–60, 177; evolution of, 28, 60, 108, 136, 144, 145, 154, 164. See also universal fellowship

civil service reform, 108

Civil War, US, 21, 92, 135, 189

claims as relational obligations, 2, 87, 91, 93–95, 96, 97

class relations, 29, 31, 40, 47, 53–54; danger of class divisions, 50–51, 57–58, 59–60, 65, 88–89, 98–99, 130; obligations of higher to lower classes, 30, 48, 101, 110–11, 118–19, 137–38

Cleveland, Grover, 78

Coit, Stanton, 38; Ethical Democracy, 173–74

Coleridge, Samuel Taylor, 8, 61, 64, 83, 149

“College Woman and the Family Claim, The” (Addams), 67, 69, 112, 118, 177, 178–79; Addams’s analysis as ecological, 95–96; geographical axis of, 91–92; historical axis of, 92–93; and tension between family claim and social claim, 93–95

Comte, Auguste, 8, 81, 117; positivism of, 20, 35, 36, 38, 40, 160; and Religion of Humanity, 37, 188; sociology of, 68, 164

Congress on Industrial Conciliation and Arbitration, 43, 89

Conn, Steven, 135, 137

cooperation, concept of, 13, 15, 69, 74, 89, 144

cooperative movement, 3–4

corporate consciousness, 159, 175

corruption. See municipal corruption

Creelman, Harlan, 115

Cubberley, Ellwood P., 126

cultural pluralism, 122

customs. See primitive ethics

Danisch, Robert, 12

Dante Alighieri, 189

Darrow, Clarence, 163

Darwin, Charles, 7, 42, 81, 122, 133, 152, 161, 174, 187; aesthetic lens of, 61–63; The Descent of Man, 32, 58, 59; and evolution of ethics, 32, 33, 34, 51, 58–60, 107, 116, 163, 181; and natural selection, 6, 7, 64–65; The Origin of Species, 32, 62, 63, 64; and synthetic imagination, 63–65

Darwinism, 6, 9, 162

Daston, Lorraine, 54–55

Debs, Eugene, 78

Declaration of Independence, 21

Delegard, Kirsten, 92

democracy, 4–5, 21, 49–50, 111, 166; as evolving, 28–32, 81, 109, 122–23. See also Addams, Jane: conception of social democracy

Democracy and Social Ethics (Addams), 1–5, 10, 13–22, 23, 28, 37, 67, 100, 105, 124, 147, 163, 165, 166, 167–89; and German historicism, 168–76; paradox of, 185–89; reviews of, 167, 168, 169, 171, 173, 181, 183, 185–86; revising earlier essays for, 176–85; as scientific and evolutionary, 147, 165

Descartes, René, 10, 61, 122

Devine, Edward, 170

Dewey, Alice, 21, 88

Dewey, John, 5, 20, 21, 65–66, 115, 147, 155, 156, 165; on education, 131–32, 144; Ethics, 20, 66; Hegelian idealism of, 20, 66, 150; on “A Modern Tragedy,” 88–90; School and Society, 131; “The School as Social Centre,” 131; “Significance of the Problem of Knowledge,” 150–51, 154. See also Laboratory School

Dickinson, G. Lowes, 14

discourse, evolutionary, 6–7, 10, 18, 20, 31, 40–41, 51, 69–70, 120, 122, 183–84

domestic service, 67, 85, 98, 169, 177, 184; ethics of, 70–77. See also “Belated Industry, A” (Addams); feudal ethics; “Household Adjustment” (Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams)

Dorcas Federal Labor Union, 43

Dorrien, Gary, 173

doubt, 22, 54–55, 115. See also perplexities; self-distrust

Du Bois, W. E. B., 14, 170

du Sable, Jean Baptiste Pointe, 24, 196n6

Eaton, Isabel, 71

economics. See capitalism (laissez faire or political economy); Fabian socialism; Marxism

education: Addams’s philosophy of, 129–30, 132, 134, 143–45, 155, 181–83; and business, 128–29; failures of, 125–26, 127–29, 160; function of, 126–28, 134, 143; higher, 91–92. See also Dewey, John: on education; “Educational Methods” (Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams); “First Outline of a Labor Museum at Hull-House, Chicago” (Addams); “Foreign-Born Children in the Primary Grades” (Addams); Hull House Labor Museum; Outlook Tower

“Educational Methods” (Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams), 181–83. See also “First Outline of a Labor Museum at Hull-House, Chicago” (Addams); “Foreign-Born Children in the Primary Grades” (Addams); “Function of the Social Settlement, A” (Addams)

Edwards, R. A. R., 173

Eliot, George, 42, 99, 187; Adam Bede, 61–62; Addams’s use of, 55–58, 60, 87, 93–94, 96, 144; Daniel Deronda, 62; and literary realism, 62–63; Middlemarch, 62; The Mill on the Floss, 55, 56, 64, 93–94, 144, 185, 189; “O May I Join the Choir Invisible,” 37; and positivism, 36–37, 38, 80; and science, 61–62; on sympathy, 55–56, 63, 65, 163, 186; and synthetic imagination, 61–65

Elliott, John Lovejoy, 147

Elshtain, Jean Bethke, 35–36

Ely, Richard T., 13–14, 90, 102, 169, 170, 171, 183, 187; The Labor Movement in America, 171; and social gospel, 172–73; Studies in the Evolution of Industrial Society, 171

Emerson, Ralph Waldo, 80

emotion: as integrated with instinct, body, intellect, and action, 27, 28, 31–33, 34–35, 64, 75–76; and social affiliation, 51, 85, 93–94, 96, 153, 159. See also motive; motive power; perplexities; sensibilities and perceptions; sympathy: as methodological

Enlightenment concepts, 7, 22, 84, 89, 115, 122, 166, 183; critique of, 29, 30–31, 183–84. See also liberalism

equality, conceptions of, 89, 122–23, 166

Ethical Culture Society. See Society for Ethical Culture

ethical ideals, 35, 60, 151–52, 153, 156, 171, 174

“Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption” (Addams), 100, 121, 179–80; geographical axis of, 101–4; historical axis of, 104–5; primitive morality of immigrants, 105–9; reformers’ corruption, 109–10; universal kinship and democracy, 110–12

ethical theories: of care, 4, 188; Kantian, 4, 48, 183; utilitarian, 4, 48; virtue ethics, 4, 171

ethics, 6, 48, 56–57; evolution of, 26, 32–35, 38, 46, 51–52, 58–60, 105–9, 114–15, 116–17, 119–22, 151–52, 169–70, 180–81, 186. See also Addams, Jane, method of ethical deliberation; association: evolutionary movement toward; ethical ideals; ethical theories; liberalism; science: and ethics

evolution, 5–8, 52, 162, 163. See also Darwin, Charles; evolution, social (human); science; Spencer, Herbert

evolution, social (human): conceptions of, 1, 6–7, 8, 20, 22, 25, 28, 133, 143–44; and democracy, 28–32. See also Addams, Jane, method of ethical deliberation; ethics: evolution of; science: as evolutionary

evolutionary method, 6, 7–9, 16–17, 42–43, 96–97, 152–53

Fabian socialism, 59–60, 69, 80–82, 84–85, 89, 168, 170; Addams’s use of, 82, 84–85, 86–88, 90–92, 175, 179. See also Kirkup, Thomas; Webb, Beatrice Potter; Webb, Sidney

factory work, 75, 125, 128–29, 130, 183; and domestic service, 71–72, 73; and era of association, 75, 87, 98; as feudal, 85, 144

family claim. See claims as relational obligations

fellowship, 2, 12, 22, 28, 38, 40; biological need for, 70, 73–74, 75–76, 77, 87. See also universal fellowship

Fellowship of New Life, 80

feudal ethics, 83, 174, 176–79; in affluent families, 91–96; under capitalism, 77–89, 144–45; in domestic service, 70–77; psychological costs of, 17, 67–68, 73–76, 85–86, 87, 91, 94–95, 96; and social disequilibrium, 67, 69, 70, 74, 76, 86

feudalism, 72, 73, 98, 144–45; nineteenth-century idealization of, 76–77; relations under, 29, 72–73, 74, 76, 84–85, 144, 148; and social evolution, 17, 28, 67, 69, 73, 74, 76, 81, 88, 110, 169

Feuerbach, Ludwig, 61

Field, Marshall, 129

“Filial Relations” (Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams), 178–79. See also “College Woman and the Family Claim, The” (Addams); “Modern Tragedy, A” (Addams)

“First Outline of a Labor Museum at Hull-House, Chicago” (Addams), 124, 143–44, 159, 181–83; and Addams and Dewey on education, 131–32; and architecture, 138–40; and Arts and Crafts movement, 140–42; and Geddes’s Outlook Tower, 132–34; and industrial machinery, 143; organization of, 135–37

Fiske, John, 7

“Foreign-Born Children in the Primary Grades” (Addams), 124, 137, 145, 181; geographical axis of, 125–31; historical axis of, 129–31; and Italian immigrant children and education, 125–31; and manual training, 129–30

Foster, Michael, 33

Fourier, Charles, 82

Fowler, Thomas, The Principles of Morals, 34–35

Francis, Saint, 95

French Revolution, 28–29

friendly visitors, 113. See also Charity Organization Society

“Function of the Social Settlement, A” (Addams), 18, 124, 132, 141, 142; and rhetoric and function of art, 155–64; and settlements and meaning of science, 147–55; unified interpretation of, 165–66

Galison, Peter, 54–55, 138, 140

Gatens, Moira, 65

Geddes, Patrick, 132–34. See also Outlook Tower

genetic method. See evolutionary method

geographical axis, 16–17, 42–43, 53, 68–69, 100, 153; and administration of charity, 113–14; and affluent families, 91–92; and domestic service, 70–72; and education of immigrant children, 124–31; and Labor Museum, 134, 136; and labor struggles, 45–48; and municipal corruption, 101–4; and Pullman strike, 77–80. See also social statics

geology, 8, 133, 149. See also moral (and social) geology

German historical school of economics, 170

Giddings, Franklin H., 39, 115, 151, 152, 153, 164, 165

Gilman, Charlotte Perkins, 71

Gladden, Washington, 172

Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von, 55, 61

Gompers, Samuel, 43

Gooday, Graeme, 149

Gross, Matthias, 148

growth, 4; evolutionary, 7, 53, 68, 81, 117, 121, 154–55, 171; evolutionary and moral, 51, 53, 60, 118, 120, 171, 175, 184; organic, 64, 88, 95–96, 97, 109, 120

Guglielmo, Thomas A., 131

Hackett, Francis, 12

Hall, G. Stanley, 129

“Hallelujah Chorus,” 15, 37

Hamington, Maurice, 4, 90, 188

Handel, George Frideric, 15, 37

Harkavy, Ira, 148

Harold, John, 115

Harrison, Frederic, 8, 28–29, 68, 95; The Meaning of History, 37, 210n130; positivism of, 37, 38; “The Sacredness of Ancient Buildings,” 142

Haymarket Square riot, 43

Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich, 8, 20; idealism of, 38, 66, 88, 120, 121, 150

Hegner, Herman F., 152

Henderson, Charles, 170

Herron, George, 172

Hill, Adams Sherman, 11

Hill, Mary, 132

historical axis, 16–17, 18, 42–43, 53, 67–69, 98, 99, 100, 153, 176; and administration of charity, 112, 115–17; and affluent families, 91, 92–93; and domestic service, 72–75; and education of immigrant children, 124, 129–31; and Labor Museum, 134, 136; and labor struggles, 49–54; and municipal corruption, 104–5; and Pullman strike, 80–86. See also social dynamics

historical method. See evolutionary method

history as evolutionary, 37, 68, 145

“Household Adjustment” (Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams), 176–77. See also “Belated Industry, A” (Addams)

Hudson Guild, 147

Hull, Charles, 24

Hull House, 44, 139–40, 139, 162; architecture of, 138–40; and campaign against Powers, 101–2, 103; founding of, 24, 138; and labor organizing, 43, 44, 45, 47; and neighborhood conditions, 24, 26, 45, 102, 141; programs offered by, 26, 129, 138–40, 141, 162; and scientific verification, 148–55, 186. See also Hull House Labor Museum; social settlements

Hull House Labor Museum, 131–32, 134–40, 145–46, 181; architecture and, 138–40; and Arts and Crafts movement, 140–42; as democratic, 138–40; function of, 124, 132, 155; and Geddes’s Outlook Tower, 132–34, 136; organization of, 134–36; role of immigrants in, 136, 137, 140

Hull-House Maps and Papers, 45. See also “Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement, The” (Addams)

Humboldt, Alexander von, 61

Hume, David, 58

Huxley, Thomas Henry, 33, 133, 149, 150, 161

Illinois Conference of Charities, 159, 175

Illinois Social Science Association, 92

immigrants, 47, 106; Anglo-Saxon prejudice against, 11, 65, 98, 104–5, 119–20, 126; in Chicago, 24–25, 45; education of, 124–31, 155, 159–60; Italian immigrants, 125–31. See also Hull House Labor Museum; primitive ethics

individual ethics, 18, 168–87; in German historicism, 170–71, 224n23

“Industrial Amelioration” (Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams), 177–78, 183. See also “Modern Tragedy, A” (Addams)

industrialization, 23, 26–27, 29–30, 71, 81, 140–43, 144–45

Industrial Revolution, 29, 65

“injury to one is the concern of all,” 46; meaning of, 47–48, 49, 52–54, 87

instincts, 2, 7, 13, 34, 89, 181, 183, 199n68; and evolution of ethics, 58–60, 121, 163, 181; gregarious (social and sympathetic), 32–33, 35, 39, 40, 73, 76, 85–86, 95, 110–11, 118, 120, 143–44; and motive power, 35, 40, 114, 148, 172; and reason, 35, 59

International Journal of Ethics, 102, 105, 111, 121

intersectionality, 98–99

“Introduction” (to Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams), 167–68, 169, 171–72, 173–74, 184

isolation, effects of, 46–47, 73, 85–86

James, William, 3, 5, 11, 25, 147, 165, 186, 188; “The Moral Equivalent of War,” 14; “Philosophical Conceptions and Practical Results,” 150, 156–57; Principles of Psychology, 34; and religion of democracy, 188

Jesus Christ, 36, 172

Jhering, Rudolph von, 171

Joslin, Katherine, 3, 10, 155, 176, 226n69

justice, conceptions of, 56, 87, 97, 105, 107, 115, 185

Kallen, Horace, 122

Kant, Immanuel, 149, 183

Kelley, Florence, 45, 90, 102, 109, 111; Some Ethical Gains through Legislation, 45

Kellogg, Paul, 45

Kellogg, Vernon, 6

Kellor, Frances, 71

Kenney, Mary, 43

Kidd, Benjamin, 8, 51, 60; Social Evolution, 51–52

King, Martin Luther, Jr., 96

King Lear (Shakespeare), Addams’s use of, 78–88

Kirkup, Thomas, 69, 80, 81–82, 84–85, 87, 90, 144, 178; A History of Socialism, 82

Knies, Karl, 170, 171, 173

Knight, Louise W., 3–4, 5, 10, 36, 90, 167

Knights of Labor, 43, 46

Kuhn, Thomas, 2, 3

labor, history of, 124–25, 135–37, 144

Laboratory School, 131–32

labor movement, Addams’s conception of, 49–51, 53–54, 58, 87–88. See also labor union movement; universal fellowship

Labor Museum. See Hull House Labor Museum

labor union movement, 29, 43, 44, 46–48, 57, 75, 85–86, 183. See also “Modern Tragedy, A” (Addams); Pullman strike; “Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement, The” (Addams)

Lamarck, Jean-Baptiste, 7

Lankester, Edwin Ray, Degeneration, 47

lateral progress, 87–88

Laundry Employes’ Union, 43

Lears, Jackson, 143

Le Conte, Joseph, 8, 117, 163, 220n20

Lewes, George Henry, 61

liberalism, 3–4, 30, 170, 183; Addams’s critique of, 31, 52–53, 96–97, 122–23, 142–43

Linn, James Weber, 37, 134

literary realism, 63–64

literature: affinities with science, 11, 32–33, 60–65, 121, 163–66, 204n107; function of, 12, 55–56, 163–64. See also Addams, Jane, rhetoric and writing style

Lloyd, Henry Demarest, 90, 102

Lowell, James Russell, “Ode to France,” 57

Lucier, Paul, 149

Luther, Jessie, 135

MacDonald, J. Ramsay, 174

Marshall, Henry Rutgers, 7

Marshall, Margaret, 11

Martineau, Harriet, 58

Marx, Karl, 29, 52, 82, 84

Marxism, 52, 81–82, 170, 178, 202n34, 207n55; Addams’s critique of, 50, 52, 90–91

Maude, Aylmer, 186

Mazzini, Giuseppe, 29, 40, 94, 95, 120, 186; Addams’s use of, 30, 31, 49–50, 65, 69, 86, 87, 93; The Duties of Man, 29, 93

McNary, Jean, 12

Mead, George Herbert, 170

Menand, Louis, 88–90

Mendel, Gregor, 6

methodology of this book, 1–3, 5–6, 9–10, 13–18. See also Addams, Jane, method of ethical deliberation

Micah (Old Testament prophet), 118

Mill, John Stuart, 8, 58

Miller, Donald L., 90

Milton, John, 142, 143

“Modern Lear, A” (Addams), 80, 88. See also “Modern Tragedy, A” (Addams)

“Modern Tragedy, A” (Addams), 51, 67, 69, 88–91, 92, 93, 95, 118, 177–78; critiques of, 80, 83–84, 88–89; Dewey on, 88–90; geographical axis of, 77–80; historical axis of, 80–86; and Pullman as feudal lord, 82–86; and Pullman’s workers and ethics of association, 86–88. See also capitalism (laissez faire or political economy); King Lear (Shakespeare), Addams’s use of; Pullman, George; Pullman strike

Moore, Dorothea, 140

moral (and social) geology, 17–18, 100, 101, 104, 110, 111, 112, 133, 136, 153, 155, 158, 166

morality. See ethics

Morley, John, 8, 115; Addams’s use of, 52, 95–96; On Compromise, 95

Morris, William, 74, 76, 140–42, 144; A Dream of John Ball, 74

motive, 2, 13, 15, 26, 31–32, 40, 85, 171–72; for social settlements, 27–41. See also motive power

motive power, 34–35, 39, 50, 51, 114, 120, 183, 199n67, 199n68. See also motive

municipal corruption, 101–11, 171–80. See also “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption” (Addams); Powers, Johnny

museums, 134–35

Nackenoff, Carol, 188

National Cash Register (NCR), 181–83, 182, 226n85, 226n86, 226n88

National Civic Federation, 183

National Conference of Charities and Corrections, 113

National Educational Association, 124–26, 129, 146

neighborliness, idea of, 46–48

Newman, John Henry, 11

Newton, Isaac, 122

oppression, 97

Outlook Tower, 131, 132–34, 136

Owen, Robert, 82

Pater, Walter, 8; Appreciations, 158–59; Marius the Epicurean, 36, 199n82

patriarchy, 98–99

Patten, Simon, 14, 170

Patterson, John H., 182–83, 182, 226n88

Peirce, Charles Sanders, 5, 7, 20, 54, 156

penumbra of associations, 3, 6, 13, 14, 16, 20, 21, 40, 122; of evolution, 5–6, 27; of fellowship, 74; of feudal, 72, 83, 98, 177; of perplexity, 100, 112, 115; of primitive, 100, 104; of science, 100, 112, 117, 147, 151–52

perception. See sensibilities and perceptions

perplexities, 2, 4, 100, 112, 120–21, 184, 188, 213n72; experienced by Addams, 116–19, 152–53, 180–81; experienced by charity visitor, 113–14, 153, 180; meaning of, 114–15

personality, 105–6, 152, 175

Phelps, Elizabeth Stuart, 115

philanthropy, 33, 78, 119, 177–78

Plato, 150

pluralism, cultural, 122

“Political Reform” (Democracy and Social Ethics, Addams), 100, 179–80. See also “Ethical Survivals in Municipal Corruption” (Addams)

Pollock, Frederick, 7–8

Pond, Allen B., 138–40

Pond, Irving K., 138–40

Popular Science Monthly, 32, 60, 204n89

Porter, Theodore M., 164–65

positivism, 20, 35–38, 160. See also Comte, Auguste; Eliot, George; Harrison, Frederic; Webb, Beatrice Potter; Webb, Sidney

Powers, Johnny, 103, 116, 155, 179–80, 184; Addams’s analysis of, 105–9; as corrupt, 101–5, 111; as holding a primitive morality, 108–9; Hull House campaign against, 102

pragmatism, 5, 20, 54, 99, 156, 185; Addams and, 1, 3, 4, 5, 20, 54, 65–66, 148

primitive ethics, 101, 104–11, 115–18, 169, 170, 179–80

progress, 39, 50–51, 86, 87–88, 154; and evolution, 6, 8, 25, 51–53, 59–60, 89–90, 95, 107–8, 122, 135–36, 163. See also growth: organic; social dynamics; universal fellowship

propinquity, 45–48, 56–57, 59

psychology, evolutionary, 11, 27, 34, 35, 40, 67, 86, 89. See also Addams, Jane: psychological analyses by

Puckett, John L., 148

Pullman, George, 51, 67, 77–80, 91, 94, 95, 97, 109, 118, 129, 172, 177–78, 183, 184; compared to King Lear, 82–90. See also “Modern Tragedy, A” (Addams)

Pullman, town of, 78, 83

Pullman strike, 9, 21, 43, 51, 57, 66, 77–78, 79, 189

Putnam, Frederick Ward, 136–37

Ransom, Reverdy, 172

Rauschenbusch, Walter, 172

reason (intellect), 27, 40, 48, 115; and emotion, 27, 28, 32, 33, 40, 64, 94–95, 113–14, 158; and evolution, 35, 59, 105, 115. See also doubt; perplexities

reconciliation, 91, 93–95, 97, 188–89

reconstruction, 2, 97, 143, 144, 146, 150–51, 189

religion of democracy, 80, 188

Religion of Humanity, 37

rhetoric, 10–11. See also Addams, Jane, rhetoric and writing style

Richards, Robert, 61

Richmond, Mary, 113

Rockford Female Seminary (Rockford College), 32

Rockford Female Seminary Scientific Association, 32

Romanticism, 8, 14, 25, 63–64, 80, 157

Rosenberg, Rosalind, 165

Ross, Dorothy, 164

Ross, Edward A., 126, 170

Royce, Josiah, 119–20

Ruskin, John, 62, 76, 140–41, 144

Saint-Simon, Comte de (Henri), 82

Salmon, Lucy, Domestic Service, 71

Salter, William, 38, 112

Sarvasy, Wendy, 188

Schäfer, Axel, 170

Schmoller, Gustav, 170

School of Applied Ethics, 25–26

Schultz, Rima Lunin, 35, 36

Schuyler, Eugene, 130–31

science, 17, 54–55, 147–55, 161, 164–65, 186, 195n36; and ethics, 26, 38, 39, 147, 154–55; as evolutionary, 36, 52, 68, 116–17, 151–53, 180–81, 186, 220n20; and literature, 11, 32–33, 60–65, 121, 163–66, 204n107

scientists, ethical responsibilities of, 20, 54–55, 147, 153–55, 161, 169, 170–71, 186

Scott, Sir Walter, 76

Scudder, Horace E., 78, 83, 84

Scudder, Vida, 121, 172; Social Ideals in English Letters, 121

Seigfried, Charlene Haddock, 4, 5, 20, 148

self-distrust, 54–58, 185. See also doubt

self-righteousness, 86, 111, 119, 163

Seligman, Edwin R. A., 170, 173

Seligman, Joseph, 173

sensibilities and perceptions, 11–12, 55, 58, 61, 62, 86, 93, 137–38, 153, 158, 159, 175–76; moral, 10, 11, 12–13, 56, 65, 104, 109, 159, 163, 168

separate spheres ideology, 74–75

“Settlement as a Factor in the Labor Movement, The” (Addams), 17, 44, 67, 68, 76, 77, 93, 96, 109, 110, 111, 184; and Addams, Darwin, and Eliot, 58–65; and Addams and Dewey on ethics, 65–66; and ethical deliberation and self-distrust, 54–58; geographical axis of, 43–48; historical axis of, 49–54

settlements, social. See social settlements

Shakespeare, William, 14, 78, 80. See also “Modern Tragedy, A” (Addams)

Shaw, George Bernard, 172

Shelley, Percy Bysshe, A Defense of Poetry, 12

Simhkovitch, Mary Kingsbury, 170

slavery, 11, 51, 137, 145, 160

Small, Albion, 25, 151, 152, 154, 164, 165, 169, 170

Smith, Adam, 48, 58

social claim. See claims as relational obligations

social Darwinism, 6, 194n24

social dynamics, 16–17, 68–69, 101, 127, 152–53, 158; from feudal to era of association, 72–75, 81, 83–86, 88, 91, 93; from individual to social ethics, 169–70, 175–76; from political to social democracy, 28–32, 166; psychological responses to, 75–76, 85–87, 94–95, 117–19, 171–72, 173, 181. See also historical axis

social ethics, 18, 154, 165, 168–87; in German historicism, 170–71, 184–85

social evolution. See evolution, social (human)

social gospel movement, 35–36, 37, 172–73

socialism. See Fabian socialism; Marxism

social organism, 8, 21, 25, 27, 50, 68, 74, 126, 175; health of, 25–26, 31, 36, 65, 81, 117–18, 154, 166

social reform, conceptual setting for, 11, 12–13, 22–24, 38–39, 80, 108, 145–46

social settlements, 39, 112–13, 128, 138, 152, 192; labor movement, role in, 42–54; motives for, 27–39; as scientific, 148–55, 157–58, 163–64, 166

social statics, 16–17, 68–69, 151–53. See also geographical axis

Society for Ethical Culture, 35, 38, 69, 147, 169, 173–74

Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings, 142

sociology, conceptions of, 16–17, 68, 151–55, 164–65, 172–73; Addams as sociologist, 169–70

Socrates, 150

South End Settlement, 39

Spencer, Herbert, 7, 25, 32, 81, 175, 194n24; on evolution of ethics, 33, 51, 107, 163

Spinoza, Baruch, 61

Starr, Ellen Gates, 24, 43, 135, 140

Stevens, Alzina, 43

Stout, G. F., 115

Strauss, David, 61

Strong, Josiah, 172

Sturtevant, William C., 135

“Subjective Necessity for Social Settlements, The” (Addams), 15, 17, 23, 26–27, 40–41, 49, 68, 73, 75, 76, 81, 94, 169; and biological instincts, 32–35; and evolution of democracy, 28–32; and renaissance of Christianity, 35–40

“Subtle Problems of Charity, The” (Addams), 100, 101, 119–23, 152–53, 159, 180–81; and ethical ambiguity, 118–19; and evolution of science, 116–18; geographical axis of, 112–14; historical axis of, 115–17; perplexity, meaning of, 114–19

Sumner, William Graham, 7

survivals, 100, 104, 114, 122, 166, 169, 180

Swope, Gerald, 132, 216n45

sympathy, 2, 10–11, 34–35, 111, 198n64; and ethics, 34–35; evolution of, 51, 59–60, 107, 108; as methodological, 39, 40, 55, 65, 120–21. See also Eliot, George: on sympathy; instincts: gregarious (social and sympathetic)

synthetic imagination, 62, 63–65, 143

Taylor, Bob Pepperman, 9

Tennyson, Alfred Lord, In Memoriam, 54

Thomas, William I., 170

Thoreau, Henry David, 61, 80

Tolstoy, Leo, 147–48, 155–56, 161, 163, 186; Addams’s use of, 155–61, 164–65, 174–75; “Master and Man,” 188–89; What Is Art?, 157–58; What to Do?, 160

Toynbee, Arnold, 29, 69, 187; Addams’s use of, 30, 49–50, 58, 60, 65; Lectures on the Industrial Revolution, 29

Toynbee Hall, 23, 24, 29, 33, 37

Tylor, Edward Burnett, 104

unions. See Hull House: and labor organizing; labor union movement

universal fellowship, 49–50, 51, 52, 53–54, 56–57, 59, 60, 76, 87, 109, 110–12, 146. See also universal kinship

universal kinship, 110–12, 119, 188

University of Bombay, 133

University of California, Berkeley, Philosophical Union, 156

University of Chicago, 148, 164, 165, 170, 186, 212n49

Veblen, Thorstein, 141–42

Verein für Socialpolitik, 171

Vincent, George, 151–52, 162, 165

Völkerpsychologie, 100–101

Wagner, Adolf, 170

Wald, Lillian, 132

Walker, Francis A., 119

Wallas, Graham, 11–12, 67

Ward, Lester Frank, 75–76, 151

Warner, Amos, 113

Washburne, Marion Foster, 137, 144

Webb, Beatrice Potter, 8, 26, 38, 68, 80–81, 82, 165

Webb, Sidney, 8, 69, 80–82, 84, 85, 86, 88, 90, 144, 149–50, 178, 186, 187

Weill, Jeanne (“Dick May”), 165

Westbrook, Robert, 66, 88–90

Westminster Review, 61, 62

Whipps, Judy D., 188, 216n39, 223n7

Wickberg, Daniel, 11

Willard, Frances, 172

Woman’s Cloakmakers’ Union, 57

women, 30, 48, 70–71, 91–92, 165; ethical obligations of, 30, 74–75, 177; and unions, 43, 44, 47

Women’s Aid Association, 92

Women’s Christian Temperance Union, 92

Woods, Robert, 39

Wordsworth, William, 14, 32, 61; “The Idiot Boy,” 39; “Intimations of Immortality,” 33

World’s Columbian Exposition of 1893 (Chicago), 70, 136–37

World’s Congress of Representative Women, 70

World’s Fair, Paris, 1900, 133

Wright, Frank Lloyd, 142

Wundt, Wilhelm, 100–101, 116, 119, 121–22, 132, 188; Ethics, Addams’s use of, 105–9

Yarros, Victor, 163

Yerkes, Charles, 101–2, 105, 111, 212n49

Zueblin, Charles, 133–34, 170