nition in an ethical theory that remains, but it seems unlikely that the recognition will take the form of such a sharp separation as is indicated by Münsterberg and Croce.
The realistic treatment of values is opposed to the subjectivity implied in the emotional theory; it is likewise implicitly opposed to a theory which has no standards but the mores. For in holding that goodness is a quality of things just as square is we seem to predicate a value independent of any conscious attitude toward it. This is reenforced by the doctrine that right depends on consequences, for consequences are what they are. What is right is therefore independent of men's opinions; its rightness cannot vary according as the person judging varies in attitude; the same act cannot be at once wrong to you and right to me because it calls out differing emotions. Perry does not agree with the English realists in their contention that values are independent of conscious attitudes—interests and purposes—but he believes that there is a maximum value which transcends the relativity of particular interests.
The second radical conception that has been gradually emerging in the study of moral origins is that of the moral as an intimate inseparable part of the whole process of living. This was not present in the literature at the beginning of this period as a determining point of view. Marriage customs, burial customs, slavery customs, property customs were gathered from peoples at all stages of culture, and assembled promiscuously. Even the great collection of Westermarck is largely made on this method. The maxim of the economic interpretation of history was indeed well known, but it was usually applied too simply to be fruitful in interpreting the complex facts of custom, to say nothing of morals. An early essay by Grosse on Forms of the Family as related to types of industry was a suggestive study. It was, however, an article by Dewey on Interpretation of Savage Mind that showed decisively the inadequacy of the current method of treatment. He pointed out how absurd it is to make sweeping abstract statements about, for example, the laziness of the savage. Such statements have usually been made from the point of view of the European who is accustomed to a
