why the americans display more readiness and more taste for general ideas than their forefathers, the english.

the deity does not regard the human race collectively. he surveys at one glance and severally all the beings of whom mankind is composed, and he discerns in each man the resemblances which assimilate him to all his fellows, and the differences which distinguish him from them. god, therefore, stands in no need of general ideas; that is to say, he is never sensible of the necessity of collecting a considerable number of analogous objects under the same form for greater convenience in thinking. such is, however, not the case with man. if the human mind were to attempt to examine and pass a judgment on all the individual cases before it, the immensity of detail would soon lead it astray and bewilder its discernment: in this strait, man has recourse to an imperfect but necessary expedient, which at once assists and demonstrates his weakness. having superficially considered a certain number of objects, and remarked their resemblance, he assigns to them a common name, sets them apart, and proceeds onwards.

general ideas are no proof of the strength, but rather of the insufficiency of the human intellect; for there are in nature no beings exactly alike, no things precisely identical, nor any rules indiscriminately and alike applicable to several objects at once. the chief merit of general ideas is, that they enable the human mind to pass a rapid judgment on a great many objects at once; but, on the other hand, the notions they convey are never otherwise than incomplete, and they always cause the mind to lose as much in accuracy as it gains in comprehensiveness. as social bodies advance in civilization, they acquire the knowledge of new facts, and they daily lay hold almost unconsciously of some particular truths. the more truths of this kind a man apprehends, the more general ideas is he naturally led to conceive. a multitude of particular facts cannot be seen separately, without at last discovering the common tie which connects them. several individuals lead to the perception of the species; several species to that of the genus. hence the habit and the taste for general ideas will always be greatest amongst a people of ancient cultivation and extensive knowledge.

but there are other reasons which impel men to generalize their ideas, or which restrain them from it.

the americans are much more addicted to the use of general ideas than the english, and entertain a much greater relish for them: this appears very singular at first sight, when it is remembered that the two nations have the same origin, that they lived for centuries under the same laws, and that they still incessantly interchange their opinions and their manners. this contrast becomes much more striking still, if we fix our eyes on our own part of the world, and compare together the two most enlightened nations which inhabit it. it would seem as if the mind of the english could only tear itself reluctantly and painfully away from the observation of particular facts, to rise from them to their causes; and that it only generalizes in spite of itself. amongst the french, on the contrary, the taste for general ideas would seem to have grown to so ardent a passion, that it must be satisfied on every occasion. i am informed, every morning when i wake, that some general and eternal law has just been discovered, which i never heard mentioned before. there is not a mediocre scribbler who does not try his hand at discovering truths applicable to a great kingdom, and who is very ill pleased with himself if he does not succeed in compressing the human race into the compass of an article. so great a dissimilarity between two very enlightened nations surprises me. if i again turn my attention to england, and observe the events which have occurred there in the last half-century, i think i may affirm that a taste for general ideas increases in that country in proportion as its ancient constitution is weakened.

the state of civilization is therefore insufficient by itself to explain what suggests to the human mind the love of general ideas, or diverts it from them. when the conditions of men are very unequal, and inequality itself is the permanent state of society, individual men gradually become so dissimilar that each class assumes the aspect of a distinct race: only one of these classes is ever in view at the same instant; and losing sight of that general tie which binds them all within the vast bosom of mankind, the observation invariably rests not on man, but on certain men. those who live in this aristocratic state of society never, therefore, conceive very general ideas respecting themselves, and that is enough to imbue them with an habitual distrust of such ideas, and an instinctive aversion of them. he, on the contrary, who inhabits a democratic country, sees around him, one very hand, men differing but little from each other; he cannot turn his mind to any one portion of mankind, without expanding and dilating his thought till it embrace the whole. all the truths which are applicable to himself, appear to him equally and similarly applicable to each of his fellow-citizens and fellow-men. having contracted the habit of generalizing his ideas in the study which engages him most, and interests him more than others, he transfers the same habit to all his pursuits; and thus it is that the craving to discover general laws in everything, to include a great number of objects under the same formula, and to explain a mass of facts by a single cause, becomes an ardent, and sometimes an undiscerning, passion in the human mind.

nothing shows the truth of this proposition more clearly than the opinions of the ancients respecting their slaves. the most profound and capacious minds of rome and greece were never able to reach the idea, at once so general and so simple, of the common likeness of men, and of the common birthright of each to freedom: they strove to prove that slavery was in the order of nature, and that it would always exist. nay, more, everything shows that those of the ancients who had passed from the servile to the free condition, many of whom have left us excellent writings, did themselves regard servitude in no other light.

all the great writers of antiquity belonged to the aristocracy of masters, or at least they saw that aristocracy established and uncontested before their eyes. their mind, after it had expanded itself in several directions, was barred from further progress in this one; and the advent of jesus christ upon earth was required to teach that all the members of the human race are by nature equal and alike.

in the ages of equality all men are independent of each other, isolated and weak. the movements of the multitude are not permanently guided by the will of any individuals; at such times humanity seems always to advance of itself. in order, therefore, to explain what is passing in the world, man is driven to seek for some great causes, which, acting in the same manner on all our fellow-creatures, thus impel them all involuntarily to pursue the same track. this again naturally leads the human mind to conceive general ideas, and superinduces a taste for them.

i have already shown in what way the equality of conditions leads every man to investigate truths for himself. it may readily be perceived that a method of this kind must insensibly beget a tendency to general ideas in the human mind. when i repudiate the traditions of rank, profession, and birth; when i escape from the authority of example, to seek out, by the single effort of my reason, the path to be followed, i am inclined to derive the motives of my opinions from human nature itself; which leads me necessarily, and almost unconsciously, to adopt a great number of very general notions.

all that i have here said explains the reasons for which the english display much less readiness and taste or the generalization of ideas than their american progeny, and still less again than their french neighbors; and likewise the reason for which the english of the present day display more of these qualities than their forefathers did. the english have long been a very enlightened and a very aristocratic nation; their enlightened condition urged them constantly to generalize, and their aristocratic habits confined them to particularize. hence arose that philosophy, at once bold and timid, broad and narrow, which has hitherto prevailed in england, and which still obstructs and stagnates in so many minds in that country.

independently of the causes i have pointed out in what goes before, others may be discerned less apparent, but no less efficacious, which engender amongst almost every democratic people a taste, and frequently a passion, for general ideas. an accurate distinction must be taken between ideas of this kind. some are the result of slow, minute, and conscientious labor of the mind, and these extend the sphere of human knowledge; others spring up at once from the first rapid exercise of the wits, and beget none but very superficial and very uncertain notions. men who live in ages of equality have a great deal of curiosity and very little leisure; their life is so practical, so confused, so excited, so active, that but little time remains to them for thought. such men are prone to general ideas because they spare them the trouble of studying particulars; they contain, if i may so speak, a great deal in a little compass, and give, in a little time, a great return. if then, upon a brief and inattentive investigation, a common relation is thought to be detected between certain obtects, inquiry is not pushed any further; and without examining in detail how far these different objects differ or agree, they are hastily arranged under one formulary, in order to pass to another subject.

one of the distinguishing characteristics of a democratic period is the taste all men have at such ties for easy success and present enjoyment. this occurs in the pursuits of the intellect as well as in all others. most of those who live at a time of equality are full of an ambition at once aspiring and relaxed: they would fain succeed brilliantly and at once, but they would be dispensed from great efforts to obtain success. these conflicting tendencies lead straight to the research of general ideas, by aid of which they flatter themselves that they can figure very importantly at a small expense, and draw the attention of the public with very little trouble. and i know not whether they be wrong in thinking thus. for their readers are as much averse to investigating anything to the bottom as they can be themselves; and what is generally sought in the productions of the mind is easy pleasure and information without labor.

if aristocratic nations do not make sufficient use of general ideas, and frequently treat them with inconsiderate disdain, it is true, on the other hand, that a democratic people is ever ready to carry ideas of this kind to excess, and to espouse the with injudicious warmth.