In ethical theory individualism is not now so important a factor as it was a century or so ago. Pure individualism is incompatible with morality as ordinarily understood. If each inan's ideals are the measure of his morality, Moral ity ceases to have any general meaning. This is frankly reeognized by some individualists; but some, on the other hand, still maintain the pos sibility of carrying their theory out logically without detriment to morality. The typieal rep resentatives of the latter view are to be found among those who claim for the individual con science the right to pass definitively upon all questions of morals. "There is no snch thing as an erring eonscience." they say. In some thinkers. as. for example. Kant, the individualism of the conscienee theory of morals is offset by the uni versalism of the criterion of reason. which directs the conscience. One must see one's duty only in what can he duty for all. The combination of individualism and anti-individualism in an ethics of conscience is. however, a tour de force which can be successfully achieved only by those who have a higher standard for morality than either vonseienee or pure reason. But when this higher standard is lacking, individualism gets the upper hand. and we have as the logical result the view that everything is right %%bleb a man thinks to be right. The individual with all his idiosyncrasies becomes the measure of the universe. Atost ethical thinkers have come to see that this is the natural consequence of the conten tion that conscience is the supreme orbit( r lourian, while nairal practice has always been controlled by other influences beside: the con science of the indisidual. (Jr perhaps it would be more correct to say that these other influences operate upon a man by giving character direction to his conscience, so that while lie is guided by his conscience. that conscience is not
merely an individual peeilliarity. it reflects with greater or less accuracy the ideals of his commu nity—a community sometimes large, sometimes small, but, whether large or small, of decisive influence in determining the kind of con science the man is to lime. Hence, as conscience is not something ultimate and intuitive, but de ivative, there is no reason for supposing that its dictates are incorrect. The individual reflects the opinions, prejudices, superstitions, and sane judgments of a community, and gives to them perhaps an individual coloring. especially in mat ters bearing on his own conduct. 'file result we call conscience.
The history of individualism cannot here be given. All that can be done is to refer to other articles in this Eneyclopedia treating of persons who have made that history. See Sormsrs: (1110 TI ; 110111IES ; LOCKE SPINOZA ; QUESNAT ; TuttooT; SNIIT11. ADAM ; BEN IllA ; 1111161IT. .1011N ; :MARX' ; SPENCER. 11E1111E11T; NIETZ SCHE. Consult. also: Donistliorpe, /min./duff/ism, System of Polities (London, IS59); Le La doctrine indiridnoliste et re(' le (Tou 1894) ; The Seitte and the In diriduol (Glasgow-, ; Ritchie, The ciple.s of Slate Interference (London, 1591); Schmidt (:\ lax Stiller). Der Einz.ige um/ sein Eigenthurn ( Leipzig, 1815) : Speneer, rersus the Stole (London, 188 I) ; Wenzel, (;calcitischaft und Persiinlichkrit (Berlin, IS99) ; Lutoslawski„ I'eta r die Grundroroussetzungen und Consequen zen der indiridualistisehen Weltanschauung (lid `illgfors. 1895) ; Tufts and Thompson, The In diridual and His Relation to Society, as Reflected in British Ethics (Chicago, 1895).