Social Darwinism Essay

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

Can genes alone determine your DNA's place in the next generation? Are humans simply vessels for these genes?

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.

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.

European nations along the west coast of Africa for 300 years have traded slaves, gold, and ivory. During the 1500-1800 Europeans in Africa would mostly buy and sell slaves. Europeans started to gain interest in the continent and shifted to imperialism, and started seizing colonies. What was the rationale behind strong European countries conquering weaker European countries. I believe the three main reasons were Social Darwinism, Economics, and Nationalism.

In 1859, Charles Darwin published his most famous work, On the Origin of the Species by Means of Natural Selection (Encarta 96). This book explained Darwin's theory of natural selection, a process not unlike separating the wheat from the chaff, where the least fit are eliminated, and only the fittest survive. An extension of this theory known as Social Darwinism emerged in the late 19th century. "Social Darwinists believed that people, like animals and plants, compete for survival and, by extension, success in life" (Encarta 96). Under this theory, the individuals who acquire the power and wealth are deemed the fittest, while those of lower economic and social levels are considered the least fit (Griffin

Already in the late 19th century, the American Federation of Labor had begun to represent a growing segment of the American population discontented with the status quo of corporate exploitation. At the onset of the 20th century however this message began to take particular weight, as evidenced by the tripling of the AFL’s membership and the rise of the Industrial Workers of the World. Labor unions, the Socialist Party and progressives as a whole took issue with the doctrine of Social Darwinism and moved forward as a somewhat united front with the goal of bringing meaningful change to American society.

History and literature have developed in a parallel manner, as organisms often co-evolve with each other. With the publication of Darwin’s groundbreaking work, the Origin of Species, a new group of people, the Social Darwinists, applied the theory of natural selection to social hierarchy. A most notable Social Darwinist, Herbert Spencer, coined the term “survival of the fittest”, implying that people in higher social groups were more “fit” to survive than those who were in lower social groups (Bannister, “Social Darwinism”). This idea of social evolution contributed to the dehumanization of people. More social theorists, scientists, and

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

At the beginning of the 1800s, scientists knew of some kinds of fossils, and were very aware of homologous and vestigial structures. Many scientists suspected that some kind of evolution had given rise to living things around them. However, they had no theory to explain how evolution might have occurred. Two scientists led the way in the search for a mechanism of evolution. The first was Jean Lamarck. The second was one of the greatest figures in biology, Charles Darwin.

Looking out across the prairie and into an uncertain future, Emma reminds Sam of his brother Joe’s offer of work in Chicago. Sam resists the idea of giving up, but as he kisses Emma good-bye and rides off to town, the reader knows that hope is all but gone. This story is a great example of social Darwinism. Social Darwinism can be translated as the survival of the fittest.

Lord of the Flies, by William Golding presents the theory of Social Darwinism where the physically fit dominates over the unfit. Social Darwinism describes the physical strengths of a person which allows them to receive power even with illogical ideas or reasoning. In this society, appearance seems to affect a person’s statue, although with Social Darwinism, an individual is judged entirely by his/her physical characteristics. The individuals born with exceptional athletic abilities are seen as fit, while the unfit are those who are incapable of heavy physical activities. The display of the physically fit people acquiring a vast advantage over the unfit is explained in the Social Darwinism article and the novel Lord of the Flies.

Social Darwinism is a theory that competition among all individuals, groups, nations or ideas drives social evolution in human societies. The term draws upon Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection, where competition between individual organisms drives biological evolutionary change through the survival of the fittest. The term was popularized in 1944 by the American historian Richard Hofstadter, and has generally been used by critics rather than advocates of what the term is supposed to

Darwin and Evolution are inextricably linked in the minds of most people who have had the opportunity to study them in basic biology. However, Darwin's theories of selection and survival of the fittest have been applied to moral, economic, political, and other cultural aspects of society. Dennett briefly touched on some of the political and social ramifications of Darwin's theories in the final chapter of Darwin's Dangerous Idea. Other philosophers and thinkers have also adapted Darwin's evolutionary ideas, in order to apply them in a societal or cultural context. One great example of this adaptation of the biological concept of evolution, is the appearance of Social Darwinism during the 19th century.