The Institutional Man

Abstract

A GENERALIZATION about man embodying a clear-cut concept is necessarily an abstraction a symbol. The usefulness of the symbol as an analytical element will depend upon the precision with which it is defined so that (i) that portion of man's nature which it is meant to describe is accurately identified and (2) the limitations of the symbol are understoodthe area to which it does not apply is recognizable. Man is a two-legged animal. This generalization has a high degree of accuracy so far as pedal mathematics is concerned. The exceptions are abnormal and accidental. Yet there are certain essential connotations. One has a more or less particularistic visualization of human legs paired-distinguishable from all other two-legged beings. It is further recognizable that the symbol says nothing about the legs other than that they are two and human. They may be fat, lean, straight, crooked, hairy, hairless, light, dark, smooth, lumpy, strong, weak, etc. The biped connotation also suggests structure, posture, method of locomotion. If we maximize the physical characteristics accurately represented in the generalization or symbol, we minimize the area over which the symbol may be applied. An anthropometric definition of a race is an illustration. The specification of particulars can be carried to a point where the total description becomes unique and applies to but one individual. Leaving the field of generalization about physical characteristics, the problem of validation of descriptive symbols becomes even more difficult. We have, for the past century and a half, lived under the influence of two dominant and interrelated symbols-generalizations as to the nature of man-both of which are now in process of being discredited. They are (i) the economic man and (2) the rational man.