"3. In that although in their early, undeveloped period, there
exists between them hardly any interdependence of parts, their parts
gradually acquire an interdependence, which eventually becomes so
strong, that the life and activity of each part becomes possible
only on condition of the life and activity of the remaining parts.

"4. In that life and the development of society are independent,
and more protracted than the life and development of any one of the
units constituting it, which are born, grow, act, reproduce
themselves, and die separately; while the political body formed from
them, continues to live generation after generation, developing in
mass in perfection and functional activity."

The points of difference between organisms and society go farther;
and it is proved that these differences are merely apparent, but
that organisms and societies are absolutely similar.

For the uninitiated man the question immediately presents itself:
"What are you talking about? Why is mankind an organism, or similar
to an organism?"

You say that societies resemble organisms in these four features;
but it is nothing of the sort. You only take a few features of the
organism, and beneath them you range human communities. You bring
forward four features of resemblance, then you take four features of
dissimilarity, which are, however, only apparent (according to you);
and you thence conclude that human societies can be regarded as
organisms. But surely, this is an empty game of dialectics, and
nothing more. On the same foundation, under the features of an
organism, you may range whatever you please. I will take the fist