Addiction to athletic sports， not only in the way of direct participation， but also in the way of sentiment and moral support， is， in a more or less pronounced degree， a characteristic of the leisure class； and it is a trait which that class shares with the lower-class delinquents， and with such atavistic elements throughout the body of the community as are endowed with a dominant predaceous trend. Few individuals among the populations of Western civilized countries are so far devoid of the predaceous instinct as to find no diversion in contemplating athletic sports and games， but with the common run of individuals among the industrial classes the inclination to sports does not assert itself to the extent of constituting what may fairly be called a sporting habit. With these classes sports are an occasional diversion rather than a serious feature of life. This common body of the people can therefore not be said to cultivate the sporting propensity. Although it is not obsolete in the average of them， or even in any appreciable number of individuals， yet the predilection for sports in the commonplace industrial classes is of the nature of a reminiscence， more or less diverting as an occasional interest， rather than a vital and permanent interest that counts as a dominant factor in shaping the organic complex of habits of thought into which it enters.
As it manifests itself in the sporting life of today， this propensity may not appear to be an economic factor of grave consequence. Taken simply by itself it does not count for a great deal in its direct effects on the industrial efficiency or the consumption of any given individual； but the prevalence and the growth of the type of human nature of which this propensity is a characteristic feature is a matter of some consequence. It affects the economic life of the collectivity both as regards the rate of economic development and as regards the character of the results attained by the development. For better or worse， the fact that the popular habits of thought are in any degree dominated by this type of character can not but greatly affect the scope， direction， standards， and ideals of the collective economic life， as well as the degree of adjustment of the collective life to the environment.
Something to a like effect is to be said of other traits that go to make up the barbarian character. For the purposes of economic theory， these further barbarian traits may be taken as concomitant variations of that predaceous temper of which prowess is an expression. In great measure they are not primarily of an economic character， nor do they have much direct economic bearing. They serve to indicate the stage of economic evolution to which the individual possessed of them is adapted. They are of importance， therefore， as extraneous tests of the degree of adaptation of the character in which they are comprised to the economic exigencies of today， but they are also to some extent important as being aptitudes which themselves go to increase or diminish the economic serviceability of the individual.