Darwin’s Malthusian Moment: Did Darwin Take His Ideas from Malthus?
Examining How Others Impacted Darwin
Charles Darwin’s theories continue to have a tremendous impact in today’s world. He continues to be widely studied, and his meticulous collection of letters and articles allowed scholars to dive deeply into his thinking. The Darwin correspondence project has around 15 thousand letters and many notebooks. There is a whole industry of scholarship about how he developed his theories. Historians have debated how significantly Malthus impacted Darwin; thus, they pondered whether Malthus was a “muse, or catalyst or simply interesting reading” (Borello, 2010). Scholars have often said Reverend Malthus’ work greatly impacted his thinking. I have argued elsewhere that there are other, more significant influences.
Malthus and His Principle of Population
In 1798, Reverend Malthus wrote An Essay on the Principle of Population. Malthus argued that populations increased exponentially, whereas resources increased arithmetically. Thus, there could be a point where there would be more people than can conceivably be fed. He posited that until recently, there had been natural controls on population growth, such as disease, famine, poverty, and more. He worried that by relaxing these pressures, the Poor Laws would result in overpopulation. According to Malthus, these laws would reduce mortality without affecting birth rates and thus result in populations that could not be fed. Inevitably, the outcome would be war and disaster.
Malthus Was of Crucial Importance!
Some historians argued that Malthus was of “crucial importance” (Ruse, 2008) and that he “exer[ted] a profound influence” on Darwin (Bowler, 1983(2009)). Darwin himself noted in his autobiography that:
“being prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence which everywhere goes on, from long-continued observation of the habits of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favorable variations would tend to be preserved and unfavorable ones to be destroyed” (Darwin).
In Darwin’s book on Variation, we find the following passage.
“I saw, on reading Malthus on Population, that natural selection was the inevitable result of the rapid increase of all organic beings” (Darwin, 1868),
And in the Origin, the
“doctrine of Malthus applied with manifold force to the whole animal and vegetable kingdoms” (Darwin, 1859)
Likewise, Alfred Russel Wallace, the co-discoverer of evolution by means of natural selection, also claimed to have been inspired by Malthus (Gould, 1992).
Robert Young, a historian, argued that Darwin’s intellectual output is fully accountable as a social outgrowth from capitalist Victorian England (1969). Young sustained that Malthus was vitally important in nineteenth-century debates and thus influential to all intellectuals of the age. He contended that Malthus was vital for Darwin, for he provided the concept of population restraint in the absence of moral restraint.
I find this a little too strong because other natural philosophers accepted evolution but were unsure about the mechanism (natural selection). Had they been primed by Malthus, they would surely have embraced the most Malthusian aspects of Darwinism.
Others, like Gale, argued that Malthus was important and had an influence on Darwin (1972). He claimed that Malthus provided an avenue by which struggles could be seen to aid in the progression of societies. Some historians have suggested that Darwin developed a much bleaker view of life after reading Malthus (Desmond & Moore, 2009). For example, Bowler argued that: “Darwin’s concept of the struggle for existence does not appear in Malthus” (Bowler, 1983 (2009)).
If you have read this far, the debate appears to be settled. Malthus was pivotal. Historians say it. Darwin said it. Wallace also said it. Nevertheless, further investigation and reflection challenge this view.
Malthus Was Not Essential
According to historian of science Gordon, there is “no substantial support” that “can be provided for the thesis that the Darwinian theory of evolution drew significantly upon ideas in contemporary Political Economy” (Gordon, 1989).
Gordon argued that Darwin was not impressed by what political economists widely accepted and that his theory had some significant differences (1989). Gordon documented that other economists had already argued about different growth rates between population and resources. Darwin only used the idea that population growth exceeds the production of goods to sustain the population; hence, some population members will die. This view was in sharp contrast to other naturalists at the time, who thought the number of offspring that could survive was equivalent to the amount produced.
Secondly, Gordon argued that this concept of competition was radically different in political economy and natural science (1989). He claimed that ‘competition’ in economics established a harmonious balance. The existence of many producers meant no one could control prices or undermine quality and could also meet demand at market price. In sharp contrast to Darwin, competition is a zero-sum game where organisms thrive or die, and the process cannot be called harmonious by any stretch of the imagination (1989).
Darwin’s Developing Theory
A closer examination of the development of Darwin’s theory suggests that Malthus was not that important.
The view that Darwin held before reading Malthus persisted long after he read Malthus’s essay (Ospovat, 1995). This view held that organisms were almost perfectly adapted to their environments and that competition was only severe during climatic and environmental change (Ospovat, 1995). According to Ospovat, the turning point occurred sometime in 1856, eighteen years after Darwin first read Malthus (Ospovat, 1995; Borello). Malthus may have helped Darwin abandon natural theology, which he did a few months after reading that essay (Ospovat, 1995).
Eventually, Darwin concludes that species are pressing hard on each other, and hence, there is endless and relentless competition everywhere and at every second (Hodge, 2009). Darwin wrote in the Origin:
“It may be said that natural selection is daily and hourly scrutinizing, throughout the world, every variation, even the slightest; rejecting that which is bad, preserving and adding up all that is good; silently and insensibly working, whenever and wherever opportunity offers, at the improvement of each organic being in relation to its organic and inorganic conditions of life. We see nothing of these slow changes in progress until the hand of time has marked the long lapse of ages, and then so imperfect is our view into long past geological ages, that we only see that the forms of life are now different from what they formerly were”.
Conclusions
Reading Malthus may have helped Darwin consider some mechanisms through which evolution occurred. However, the changes that Darwin made to his theory, which are still recognized as fundamental, were made long after Darwin read Malthus. Hence, Malthus was not pivotal for the theory found within the Origin. However, helping Darwin abandon natural theology and think about population pressures may have been of utmost importance to the development of Darwin’s ideas.
Sources and other details can be found at: