Passage
Industrial production, which is the basis of all civilisation, is not, says Mr. Spencer, started on its progressive career by the sudden orders of any one remarkable man, but by the spontaneous action of certain natural causes. Its general character and its progress are always found to depend on the same thing: the division of labour. This, as Mr. Spencer says, developed in varying degrees, is the salient characteristic of every civilisation in the world. To what, then, is the division of labour, in the first instance, itself due? This is the opening question asked by Adam Smith in his Wealth of Nations. The answer which he himself suggests is, that there exists in man 'a natural propensity to truck, barter, and exchange.' The answer given by Mr. Herbert Spencer is a curious illustration of how far, since the days of Adam Smith, social science has progressed. Mr. Spencer shows us that the origin of the division of labour was no special propensity mysteriously innate in man. Its origin was the natural diversity of the various districts inhabited by the groups of men who originally took part in it. Thus 'some of the Fiji Islands,' he writes, 'are famous for wooden implements, others for mats and baskets, others for pots and pigments—unlikenesses between the natural products of the islands being the causes. . . . So also . . . the shoes of the ancient Peruvians were made in the provinces where aloes are most abundant. . . . The arms were supplied by the provinces where the materials for making them were most abundant.' Division of labour, in short, was primarily a localisation of industries, caused by the fact that a number of man’s different needs were each supplied most easily by industry in some different locality. By means of this explanation, Mr. Spencer proceeds to explain other social phenomena of a kind which seem wholly different. He proceeds to show us that though increased production of commodities was the chief direct result of the localisation of industries, certain by-products resulted from it also, whose effects were not less important. These by-products were roads. In the localisation of industries, he says, we have the true origin of road-making. The fact of industries being widely separated in place required a constant interchange of goods; and the carriage of these goods to and fro first produced tracks, then paths, and at last regular roads. But to facilitate the movement of goods is not the highest function of roads. Roads facilitate two things of a yet more interesting character—the movement of ideas and the centralisation of authority. They form the great physical basis of civilised human government, and of the development of the human intellect. Next, as to the phenomena of governmental organisations: these arise with the formation of groups larger than the family. A growing family group necessitates a fission of the group till there are a multitude of groups instead of one. The nation is formed by the recompounding of these units once again. And how is this process of 'recompounding' accomplished? Mr. Spencer answers it is accomplished by one means only: the co-operation forced on them by war for some common interest. Separately they are powerless. They must band themselves together and submit to a common leader. When the state of warfare is prolonged by the rivalry of other societies, the military leadership develops into a permanent centralised authority; and from this military government, national existence springs.
Question 1 of 4single select
We can infer from the passage that Adam Smith and Herbert Spencer would fundamentally disagree on which of the following?
The importance of the division of labour in driving the progress of human civilisation.
Whether human beings possess an inherent psychological drive to trade goods with one another.
The role of military leadership in recompounding family groups into centralized national governments.
The necessity of regular roads for the movement of ideas and the centralisation of authority.
Analysis: The Causal Chain
This passage is a perfect example of a "Process Argument." To master it, you must map the flow of cause and effect.
Mapping the Argument
How does Geography lead to Government?
Step 1Step 1: The Origin
Geographic Diversity (Different resources in different places) leads to Localisation of Industry.
(Rejects Smith's 'Innate Propensity')
Step 2Step 2: The Physical Link
Localisation requires trade -> Trade requires Roads.
Step 3Step 3: The Intellectual Link
Roads allow movement of Ideas and Authority.
Step 4Step 4: The Political Leap
Families split (Fission). War forces them to recombine (Fusion).
War -> Military Leadership -> Centralized Government.
