Compare And Contrast Social Gospel And Social Darwinism

Social Darwinism was a social theory. The same theories that were from Charles Darwin had been applied to human society. The theories on natural selection and evolution. It known that those who were stronger and superior could enjoy a wealthy and lavish lifestyle. The fittest of survival. Europeans believed that non-Europeans were lower, physically and culturally. This was believed because the Europeans, at the time, were the only people to make scientific and technological breakthroughs.

Social Darwinism was a slight distortion of Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection, which stated that species change over time because those with heritable traits that help survival are the one’s that reproduce. “Social Darwinists,” like Sumner, applied Darwin’s theory onto the human race, and then used it to justify his views in his article. He claimed that those in society who are powerful are innately better than those who are not, and their superiority is proof of this (Class notes

Social Darwinism is a theory that individuals, peoples, and groups are subject to darwinian laws of natural selection. Another way to describe social darwinism is survival of the fittest. The strongest and the smartest will survive. It is now largely discredited, it was advocated in the late 19th and early 20th century by Herbert Spencer and others. It was used to justify political conservation, imperialism, to discourage intervention and reform and racism. This theory was used to support the laissez faire capitalism and political conservatism.

From the outlooks of the late 19th century, Protestant clergyman confided to attack the social injustices that the poor were facing. In doing so, they focused on the Social Gospel, applying the Christian ideology to solve social issues. The leader of this movement had been a New York minister, Walter Rauschenbusch, who through the form of writing preached the connection of Christianity to social justices.

Social Darwinism is based off of Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection. He uses the concept of survival of the fittest. This was used to justify class distinctions and to explain the reason for poverty. Modern science declared that the failure to advance in society was due to the lack of self reliance and determination. They acted down on people who needed government aid. Even during the depression people still believed the notion that the poor were responsible for their fate. The idea of natural superiority was around since the Civil War. So much so, we thought it was okay to own human beings.

Social Darwinism is a term to describe the idea that humans compete for existence just like the rest of the animal kingdom. Darwin used this term to attempt to rationalize racism, capitalism, and imperialism. It simplifies the human’s desire for power. Now it is widely discredited and scrutinized because its a “ rejection of compassion and social responsibility.” (1)

Darwinism opened the door to Social Darwinism which was utilized to classify to people. Social Darwinism was a justification for superior behaviors over people being considered poor and incapable of succeeding due to their social class or race. This is where the survival of the fittest came into place. Classifying people based on how successful they were. The more wealthy a person was the

Social gospel and Darwinism, are two great movements with such differences. Darwinism idea of value compared to social gospels was completely different and had its own standing the community. What Darwinism supported went hand in hand with social gospel but their morals and goals were completely different and showed what kind of people they truly were. These differences as we see now shaped and changed our lives and with these movements we have developed what we believe today.

The Social Gospel started in the early twentieth century as an intellectual movement. The purpose was to live out The Lord's Prayer during our day to day lives. Social Gospel applied Christian ethics to social problems like the issues of social justice. A group of liberal Protestant progressives started the movement because they weren't satisfied with social problems around them and they did not feel enough was being done to solve the problems. Social problems associated with rapid industrialization, urbanization, and increasing immigration of the Gilded Age were the primary concern.

Social Darwinism is a quasi-philosophical, quasi-religious, quasi-sociological view that came from the mind of Herbert Spencer, an English philosopher in the 19th century. It did not achieve wide acceptance in England or Europe, but flourished in this country, as is true of many ideologies, religions, and philosophies. A good summary of Social Darwinism is by Johnson:

Darwin’s Theory of Natural Selection, a scientific theory that supported the belief of evolution, was manipulated and applied to different areas of life, and thus it became the shaping force in European thought in the last half of the nineteenth century. Darwin, through observation of organisms, determined that a system of natural selection controlled the evolution of species. He found that the organisms that were most fit and assimilated to the environment would survive. They would also reproduce so that over time they would eventually dominate in numbers over the organisms with weaker characteristics. This new theory was radical and interesting to the scientific world but its effects reach far beyond this small institution of

Social Darwinism stems from a misapplication of Darwin 's theory of evolution. In 1859 Charles Darwin published On The Origin of Species, which describes the mechanism for changes in the traits of a population over time. This mechanism, called natural selection, favors the survival, and hence the reproduction, of those

Since time immemorial man has always questioned the origins of life and himself . The answer to that question as there are three alternatives , namely the creation , transformation , or evolutionary biology .

Hi Charlie, you made a lot of interesting points about this weeks topics. While I disagree with you on the potential impact of Social Darwinism on society, you make a valid point. This approach would in many ways accelerate the pace of some tasks. I simply happen to believe that this would also cause division. By doing so, I can only contend that this system would harm the harm a society more than it would prove beneficial. To your point about inherited discrepancies, I also believe that this is true. Without them, a society would lack change and diversity. By highlighting this in your take on the link between Social Darwinism and the theory of evolution, you did a great job of expressing your point.

A Darwinist, is a description that is applied to anyone that takes human society in a biological perspective, or one who ponders upon competition. Social Darwinists really are pooled down to people who present a variety of theories ordaining that the government should not have as much power as it does, or going forth and arguing