The Northwest worker. [volume] (Everett, Wash.) 1915-1917, 1916-03-09
OPEN FORUM

that there are no stagnant pools in
Nature All is motion Everything
Is transltory.
/ A.. environment that is being inces-
sanity reacted upon cannot remain
exactly the same even for the most
lnfnitesmal space of time, and this
fact in order to substantiate my con
tention that all beings are the pro
duct of their environment, should
! show that no two of its creatures are
exactly alike. Isn't this just what
ence? And what else but this fact
can so adequately explain the mate
tendency to yariate?
0Iere the writer intimates that we
teach that the individual is not a pro
duct of his environment, which, Of
course we did notl-Ed.)
In conclusion a few words about
the so-called exceptional person: To
| follow up and show in detail how
roundings, is of course well nigh inn
possible, seeing that it Is not only the
individual that is nodded but the race.
! This being the case, so many of the
| factors making up the problem are
missing that we must very largely
draw our conclusions from those that
are available; but these, with their
logical differences, are SO overwhelm-
| ingly against the theory Of exceptions
as to be practically conclusive.
Bearing in mind that the race Is
being nodded as well as the individ-
ual, we can understand, to some ex-
tent, at least, the impulses that
moved Garrison. 1t was undoubtedly
the racial need that furnished the i'm
pulse for his acts. A philanthropist,
for example, Is unthinkable unless we
postulate on the part of others-in
other words, he receives his impulses
from his environment. Likewise with
all those that have taken the part of
the down-trodden in all ages-they
received their impulses from the eco.
nomic need of those whose cause they
espoused.
Sincerely yours,
o. H. STONE.
(In his last sentence Comrade Stone
admits all we contend for.-Ed)
DISAPPOINTING
1t is decidedly disappointing to us
to see two well-read comrades run so
far afield in taking issue with US re-
garding what they say we said. Why
not stick to the one point raised, com
rades? Why go SO far out of the way
to make it appear that we are in OPP
position to principle THAI we have
used in our editorial work for years?
We insist upon the existence of psy-
Geological ENVIRONMENT, whose
demands are sometimes in conflict
with the individuals economic IN
TERESTS. Straightway comes the
reply that psychological environment
is the product of past experience, and
has it's foundation on the economic
structure of society. Well, who says
it hasn't? We assert that ideal mo,
tives are sometimes stronger than ece-
nomic motives, or material seIf-inter-
est. Back comes a reply that our
ideals are the product of evolutionary
| forces. So they are. But we are not
discussing their origin. Our observa-
lions referred to their CONTROLL-
ING POWER, in certain cases; con.
trolling sometimes to the extent of
overcoming even the biological in
stinct of self-preservation, much less
of mastering mere desire for a few
dollars more or less. Hunger for the
realization of a cherished ideal is as
REAL as the desire for food. No one
need deny, and we certainly have not
intimated, that the ideal and the psy-
Geological have not their roots in the
economic structure of society.