The issue of sustainability is one of the most fundamental and important subjects in economics. Thomas Malthus’ bleak evaluation of humanity’s prospects in the face of overpopulation heralded a new age in economics where pessimism became the undisputed ruler of discourse. John Stuart Mill’s efforts to banish this pervasive gloom by appealing to the capabilities and intelligence of his fellow men is both inspiring and devastatingly effective. In a broader context, the struggle between Thomas Malthus and John Stuart Mill cannot be viewed as merely a peripheral debate on a singular issue; it is a battle for the very soul of economic analysis. Before delving into a comparative analysis of these two brilliant thinkers, it is essential to provide an overview of their differing theories of human nature and to examine the contexts that shaped their scholarship.
Thomas Malthus lived in a society that venerated population growth as the ultimate source of prosperity and harmony. Contemporaries of Malthus, such as clergyman William Paley, argued that the aggregate amount of ‘happiness’ in a society is almost exactly proportional to the size of its populace. It therefore comes as no surprise that the noblemen, politicians, and theologians of Malthus’ time were greatly distressed by sensational claims that England’s population was in severe decline. The hysteria of this concern was neatly encapsulated by Paley, who unambiguously asserted that a contraction of the population is
On the other hand, Thomas Malthus had little hope for the future. He believed that the world’s population will increase faster than the production of food. The human race, he believed, would starve and there would be periods of chaos. Malthus said that the population increases at an exponential rate, nearly doubling amount. There is no way food growth would be able to catch up with population growth. Malthus’ solution was “War, Famine, and Plagues”. He believed that was the only way to decrease population and hopefully salvage the human race. These events would increase death rates liberating the world of disaster. Malthus tried to persuade lower classes form creating children and from marriage. At that time the lower classes were considered to be given higher wages, which would increase the makings of children and marriages. Thomas Malthus pleaded with everyone to make a change in order to decrease population.
In 1798 utilitarian Thomas Malthus published An Essay on the Principle of Population as an argument against an utopian society based on social and economic equality. Malthus believed that if the human population is left unchecked then the population would outgrow the resources necessary to maintain the population. Malthus’s argued that the population will continue to grow and the burden will unavoidably put on the poor population. However, the inequality of population would be a good thing in terms of controlling the population.
The Corn Laws were a series of policies which aimed to stabilize the price of corn by imposing some tariffs and restrictions on corn imports. For example, they prohibited the importation of wheat when the home price fell below 80 shillings a quarter. The Parliament discussed them between the 1815 and 1846. The issue interested all the social classes, as corn was the principal food of the labouring class and farm animals, and its price variations concerned landlords’ rents. The heated debate involved several economists and statesmen, who argued on the benefits and disadvantages of the policies from different perspectives. One of its most fervid supporter was Thomas Malthus, who gave a particular contribution on the Corn Laws debate between 1814
Compare the views of these two scholars by answering the following questions. Be sure to find specific examples in the selections to support your answers.
In his essay called An Essay on the Principle of Population , the English political economist Thomas Malthus (1766-1834), stated that since production increased arithmetically
Utilitarianism defined, is the contention that a man should judge everything based on the ability to promote the greatest individual happiness. In other words Utilitarianism states that good is what brings the most happiness to the most people. John Stuart Mill based his utilitarian principle on the decisions that we make. He says the decisions should always benefit the most people as much as possible no matter what the consequences might be. Mill says that we should weigh the outcomes and make our decisions based on the outcome that benefits the majority of the people. This leads to him stating that pleasure is the only desirable consequence of our decision or actions. Mill believes that human
Summarize both thinkers view and how they are similar and different. Three quotes from each.
Different World Views As you read this comparison ponder the different opinions and the various topics in this paper. Think why these two people raised in similar circumstances have different opinions. In the 1800s, Negros were stereotyped as to only have one purpose: to mindlessly serve their masters with unquestionable loyalty. Booker T Washington and Fredrick Douglass both grew up in the harsh world that is slavery. Both were slaves for their early lives; however, Washington was freed by the Emancipation Proclamation and was able to live out his dream of attending Hampton Institute at the age of 14.
John Stuart Mill begins the explanation of his version of Utilitarianism by replying to common misconceptions that people hold regarding the theory, and as a result describes his own theory more clearly. The main issue that Mill raises is that people misinterpret the word “utility” as in opposition to “pleasure”. However, utility is actually defined as pleasure itself and also the absence of pain.
In order to accurately compare and contrast the thoughts of these two political theorist one must first
In this essay I hope to show how both authors are similar but different at the same time.
Thomas Robert Malthus is one of the most controversial figures in the history of economics. He achieved fame chiefly from the population doctrine that is now closely linked with his name. Contrary to the late-eighteenth-century views that it was possible to improve people’s living standards, Malthus held that any such improvements would cause the population to grow and thereby reverse these gains. Malthus also sparked controversy with his contemporaries on issues of methodology (by arguing that economics should be an empirical rather than a deductive science), over questions of theory (by holding that economies can experience prolonged bouts of high unemployment), and on policy issues (by arguing against free
Malthus argued that populations increase in a geometrical ratio and resources increase in an arithmetical ratio (Wetherington, 2012). This means population growth will expand exponentially higher than subsistence if no limits are placed on the population. Malthus refers to these population limits as ‘population checks’ that can ideally be used to prevent populations from expending their resources. If no population checks are exercised, the population will increase faster than the rate of their resources (Wetherington, 2012). Malthus claims a limited amount of resources and the pressure of population expansion leads to misery, despair, and triggers the struggle for existence (Wetherington, 2012; Bowler, 2003).
In “Utilitarianism,” John Stuart Mill responds to several objections to the utilitarian view, but what exactly is the utilitarianism view. Utilitarianism is the view that an action is good to the extent that it produces the greatest possible overall happiness or utility. According to Mill, utility is the pleasure itself and the absence of pain. What this means is that pleasure and the absence of pain are the only things desirable as end in themselves. It's the only things that is inherently good. A good example of utilitarianism would have to be about the Trolley Problem or to me gay rights. With gay rights, legalizing gay marriage would cause the greatest amount of happiness. Therefore, any circumstance, event, or experiences is desirable only if it for pleasure.
“Absolute liberty is the absence of restraint; responsibility is restraint; therefore, the ideally free individual is responsible to himself” - Henry Brooks Adams. There has been great debate, past and present with regards to what constitutes as an individuals liberty. It has been subject to constant ridicule and examination due to violations of civil rights. Freedom, liberty, and independence are all important human rights represented within John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty.