individualism--fail to give a real meaning to life. "Socialistic culture
directs itself chiefly to the outward conditions of life, but in care
for these it neglects life itself." Individualistic culture, on the
other hand, endeavours to deal with life itself, but fails to see life
as a whole, or as possessing any real inwardness.

Both types of culture are apt to deceive themselves in regard to their
own emptiness, because, unconsciously, they make more out of man than is
consistent with their assumptions. "They presuppose a spiritual
atmosphere as a setting for our human life and effort. In the one case,
this cementing of a union between individuals appears to set free the
springs of love and truth; in the other, each single unit seems to have
behind it the background of a spiritual world whose development is
fostered by means of its individual labour." In this way life acquires
in both cases a meaning, but it does so only by departing from both
positions, and taking up what is, at least partly, an idealistic
position.

The theories, too, can only be made really plausible by idealising man
to an unwarrantable extent. The socialist assumes that a change of
material surroundings will be immediately followed by a change in the
character of man, and that men will work happily together for the sake
of the community. The individualist asks us to believe that man is
naturally noble and highminded, and cares only for the higher and better
things. But experience, says Eucken, does not justify us in placing so
much faith in humanity. "Do we not see the great masses of our
population possessed by a passion that sweeps all before it, a reckless
spirit of aggressiveness, a disposition to lower all culture to the
level of their interests and comprehension--evincing the while a defiant
self-assertion? And on the side of individualism, what do we see? Paltry