246 THE AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY
that occurred from beginning to end of the career. Discussion of this concept could hardly be reduced to a few concise statements. We might choose from numberless societies the material for illus- tration. For instance, we might adopt Ratzenhofer's classifica- tion of the concrete interests differentiated in a modern state, as follows :
a. The universal interest : sustenance.
b. The kinship interests.
c. The national interests.
d. The creedal interests.
e. The pecuniary interests. / The class interests.
1. Extraction.
2. Artisanship.
3. Manufacture.
4. Wage labor.
5. Trade.
6. Professional and personal services.
7. Begging.
8. Pseudo-classes.
a) Capital.
b) Massed capital.
c) Massed labor. g. The rank interests.
h. The corporate interests.
With the differentiation of each of these forms of interest there naturally follows corresponding differentiation of social structures and functions. 1
13. Groups. The fact of social groups is so obvious, and is of such constant import, that we have necessarily referred to it more than once in the foregoing discussion. All that need be said further in this rapid survey is that the term "group" serves as a convenient sociological designation for any number of people, larger or smaller, between whom such relations are dis- covered that they must be thought of together. The "group"
1 The profoundest discussion of this concept is in SIMMEL'S Sociale Differen- zierungen, unfortunately out of print. RATZENHOFER devotes a chapter to much more concrete description, Die sociologische Erkenntniss, chap. 15. Specific phases of differ- entiation are referred to above under the titles " Individualization " and " Socializa- tion," AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SOCIOLOGY, Vol. VI, pp. 351-4.
