Note 19 — Part I THE GROUP PRINCIPLE

This view of purpose is not necessarily antagonistic to the “interest” school of sociology, but we may perhaps look forward to a new and deeper analysis of self-interest. And the view here put forward is not incompatible with the “objective” theory of association (see ch. XXIX) nor with the teleological school of jurisprudence (see ch. XV), it merely emphasizes another point of view—a point of view which tends to synthesize the “subjective” and “objective” theories of law. But those jurists who say that a group is governed by its purpose and leave the matter there are making a thing-in-itself of the purpose; we are governed by the purpose, yes, but we are all the time evolving the purpose. Modern jurists wish a dynamic theory of law—only such a conception of purpose as is revealed by group psychology will give value to a teleological school of jurisprudence.