Social Darwinism
From RationalWiki
Social Darwinism is a philosophy – based on flawed readings of the biological Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection - which came into existence in towards the end of the 19th century.
Social Darwinists took the biological ideas of Charles Darwin and attempted to apply them to the social sciences. They were especially interested in applying the idea of “the survival of the fittest” in a social context, as this would excuse their existing ideas of racism, colonialism, and unfettered capitalism. It was also used as a tool to argue that governments should not interfere in human competition in any way; and that the government should take no interest in, for example, regulating the economy, reducing poverty or introducing socialized medicine. In other words have a Laissez-faire policy.
Contents |
[edit] History
Social Darwinism originated in Great Britain in with the works of Herbert Spencer who coined the phrase “survival of the fittest” towards the end of the 19th century. However his work found a more fertile ground in the US where it was taken up by William Graham Sumner who was accused of advocating a “dog-eat-dog” philosophy. At the same time, the “struggle school” of social Darwinism was being developed. In this view nations grew and expanded as a result of conflicts with their neighbors. For many, this justified the overseas expansion of powerful nations at the expense of the weak and necessitated the creation of strong military forces.
At more-or-less the same time the movement of “Reform Darwinism” was born. This variant emphasized the need for change and adaption in human society to meet new conditions. For example they argued that the constitution of the United States should be reinterpreted to meet changing conditions in the US. However some reformers felt they could use the principles of Darwinism to justify racist and sexist opinions. And at the extreme of these views was eugenics. They claimed that certain races were genetically superior and that they should not be mixed with other “lower” laces.
Fortunately most of Social Darwinism’s appeal left it in the early part of the 20th century. There were a number of reasons for this including:
- It was seen as contributing to German militarism and Nazism.
- Humanity came to be seen as socially more aware than other animals.
- Revulsion at Hitler’s attempt to build a "master race" removed support for eugenics.
Finally an improved understanding of genetics and ideas about the evolutionary basis of philanthropy and compassion removed the basis of this “dog-eat-dog” philosophy.
[edit] Supporters
Given some of the goals of Social Darwinism - no socialized healthcare, unfettered capitalism, Laissez-faire government policies, strong military forces, and racial separation - it is perhaps strange that the American "religious right" use the philosophy as a snarl word. It would seem to fit their ideals nicely.
[edit] Social Darwinism and the Theory of Evolution
In any event, Darwin’s Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection says absolutely nothing about what is, or is not, morally right for humans to do. It merely describes the mechanical functioning of natural selection. Basing a moral philosophy on evolution makes about as much sense as basing morality on the theory of gravity, or the speed of light – it’s an absurdity.
[edit] See also
- Evolutionary ethics
- Neoliberalism
- Darwinism
- Fitness - for a treatment of what "survival of the fittest" actually means.
- Rugged individualism
- Free market
