Malthus, T. R. (Thomas Robert), 1766-1834; Malthusianism
The change of public opinion, illustrated by the conversion of the
_Quarterly_, gave greater bitterness to the attacks of the enemies that
remained unconverted. But it gave them no new arguments.
In Godwin’s _Enquiry concerning Population_ (when we neglect mere
epigrams such as “a man is surer that he has ancestors than that he will
have posterity”) there are substantially four arguments:—Malthus has
changed his position; the world is not peopled; the ratios are not as he
represents; and experience is against him. We have already discussed the
first. The use of the second implies a misunderstanding of the
Malthusian position, for it ignores distinction between actual and
possible supplies of food, and does not allow that a man is “confined”
by four walls unless he touches them.[835] Godwin does not mend the
argument by comparing it to the objection brought against
Christianity—“the world is not yet Christianized”; still less by
appealing to Christianity itself, and taunting Malthus with the texts,
“Increase and multiply,” “Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of
them,” “made a little lower than the angels,” “forty sons and thirty
grandsons, which rode on threescore and ten ass colts,” “In the last
days some shall depart from the faith, forbidding to marry.”[836]
Malthus had been attacked in 1807 by a Puritan or Covenanting pamphlet
entitled, ‘A summons of Wakening, or the evil tendency and danger of
Speculative Philosophy, exemplified in Mr. [Sir John] Leslie’s _Enquiry
into the Nature of Heat_, and Mr. Malthus’ _Essay on Population_, and in
that speculative system of common law which is at present administered
in these kingdoms.’[837] The body of this book had been even more
remarkable than its title, for it had proved Malthus guilty not merely
of heterodoxy, but of atheism. “It is evident to any one who attentively
reads the _Essay on Population_ that its author does not believe in the
existence of God, but substitutes for Him sometimes the principle of
Population, sometimes that of Necessity.” Sadler many years later
declared in the same spirit that “the insults the theory of Malthus
levels at God, and the injuries it meditates inflicting upon man, will
be endured by neither.”[838]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account