Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution by the mechanism of natural
selection seeks to add a sense of order to the way evolution has essentially played out over time. These mechanisms help explain the conditions and reasons as to why the course of change has occurred the way it has. Darwin's work paralleled the Thomas Malthus' viewpoints found in the published book "An Essay on the Principle of Population." In this book, Malthus argues that the human population will never outgrow its own ability to feed itself. Malthus' view of looking at human behavior as a group versus as an individual is what was groundbreaking at the time. Charles Darwin adopted this viewpoint when he developed his theory of evolution, taking humans and placing them under the same logic that applies to animals. This very idea takes into account the Darwinian mechanism of "Individuals do not evolve. Populations do." This concept played an integral role in the development of the theory. Without understand humans as a species, and not just as an individual, the rules and mechanisms would not be applicable. The church rejected Darwin and his theory seeing as it did not fall in line with the words of the bible, but that didn't stop Darwin from publishing his theory.
Source: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/history_07
Source: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/history_07
Your source is good but the information you have provided here doesn't reflect what is found in that source. Please take the time to read it carefully. It really is a could source of information on Malthus.
ReplyDeletePlease treat these assignments as papers, complete with proper formatting and paragraphs for each topic. Take this opportunity to try to teach your reader something new and show us what you know.
"In this book, Malthus argues that the human population will never outgrow its own ability to feed itself."
No, quite the opposite. Malthus understood that populations had the potential of growing exponentially, which resources tended to grow at a slower, arithmetic rate. He noticed that natural populations of animals never seemed to overpopulate their available resources. It was as if some natural force was limiting their population size. He then compared natural populations to human populations and recognized that humans seemed to be lacking this natural force (whatever it was) and as a result, humans seemed to outgrow their available resources. Malthus argued that unless humans self-regulated their reproduction (he was a huge proponent of birth control), other processes, such as famine, disease and war, would be the natural result, forcing us to cut our populations via mass death.
" Malthus' view of looking at human behavior as a group versus as an individual is what was groundbreaking at the time. "
No, as a mathematician, he treated humans as populations. What was ground-breaking was his push for humans to try to limit their population growth rates via birth control (and other methods). This was quite contrary to some church teachings, particularly those in the Catholic church.
" Charles Darwin adopted this viewpoint when he developed his theory of evolution, taking humans and placing them under the same logic that applies to animals."
No, actually Darwin didn't concern himself with humans, as he was fully aware that his ideas were explosive enough without daring to suggest that humans are subject to the same natural laws as non-humans. What caught Darwin's attention was the reference to that natural force that limited natural populations, and it made Darwin ask what was limiting the reproduction of those organisms. Malthus' emphasis on resources gave him the key... it was competition for those resources that limited population numbers. The next question was whether the limited force was random or directed. The answer was that it was directed by the environment, with those organisms with the best "fit" in that environment competing best for those resources and having more reproductive success, passing on more of those successful genes. Conversely, those who were less fit would have few (or no) offspring, and the next generation would have more of the "good" genes and less of the "bad". That describes the process of natural selection.
With regard to your choice of bullet point, Malthus was completely opposed to anything related to evolution, so he had no influence on the point of populations evolving. His points were mathematical, namely the idea that populations had the potential for exponential growth and the fact that resources are limited (because they can only increase arithmetically).
(continued, as Blogger limits comment lengths)
Delete"Without understand humans as a species, and not just as an individual, the rules and mechanisms would not be applicable."
This doesn't answer the fourth prompt, given the information I've provided you above. Would Darwin have been able to develop his theory without Malthus' work?
Actually, the church didn't know Darwin existed until after he published, though that doesn't mean the church didn't play a role in Darwin's decision to delay. Darwin delayed publishing for more than 20 years. The question is, why? And how did the influence of the church play a role in this delay? What were Darwin's concerns? And was he only worried about himself or was he also worried about how his family might be impacted by publishing?
Expand.