SOCIAL CONSERVATION 173 TF {1- c- _ ial up C= as ap- to we dy er. nit 1al zes of ia m- ler ize ad. NIN ne- che his ANS Lelr the the ive practical form to the forces and tendencies of the larger group and remain the vehicles for the attainment of its aims and purposes. Though relatively independent, these organs must serve none the less as a means to the ends of the larger group. If the process of differentiation goes too far, if they at- tain a complete independence of the group and exist only for themselves, then their useful function ceases and they become the seat of destructive tendencies. There then arises an antagonism and opposition between the whole and the parts which endangers the life of the group. The examples of this danger are numerous. Bureaucratic and legal formalism have many times placed their own require- ments above the ends of the group. In the case of legal formalism it has found its characteristic expression in the maxim fiat justitia pereat mundus. A certain amount of dependence is necessary, not only to avert the danger of antagonism and opposition, but also to enable the group to take back in certain cases the al- ready differentiated functions. In the evolution of society it often becomes necessary, for the self-preservation of the group, to throw out of service the existing organs. This may be because the specific function is no longer required, or because the rigidity of the structure prevents an ade- quate fulfilment of the function under changed conditions. When the organ proves unequal to its task, recourse must be had to the immediate reciprocities between the elements as a temporary substitute for the differentiated functional structure. Many social structures are adjusted from the beginning to such alternations between the immediate reciprocity and the fulfilment of functions by special organs. In business corporations the relation between the general meeting and the board of directors, and in political organizations the re-