Many modern scientific communities were affected by the works of Charles Darwin, including political and philosophical groups. However, this notion led to the creation of social Darwinism in the late 19th century, which caused tremendous damage to society by promoting unethical practices (Takács, 2018). Since social Darwinism takes its roots from biological concepts, the application of his theories to sociology has numerous errors stemming from misinterpreted ideas. This paper will analyze social Darwinists’ arguments and provide counterarguments.
In order to understand the reasons behind the failure of social Darwinism to describe society objectively, it is essential to review this ideology’s common arguments. This philosophy intends to place a value upon each person stemming from the complexity of their ancestors’ social structures (Spencer, 2021). However, one’s future is a subject of the current social stratification, as the people enforce hierarchies stemming from their personal views and social norms. Social Darwinists observe inequalities as a logical and unpreventable outcome of differing evolutionary trees of various communities (Spencer, 2021). This idea is a fallacy, as the immediate group surrounding an individual shapes one’s future. The complexity of society is linked with evolutionary concepts from biology, implying that the roles placed upon people through a heterogeneity of social structures are akin to Darwinist theories on survival of the fittest (Spencer, 2021). However, this approach fails to adequately incorporate the notion of cooperation in the development of humankind.
In conclusion, social Darwinism was created to benefit a questionable goal fueled by racism and relies on a misinterpretation of Charles Darwin’s theory in biology. One’s future is not predefined, as followers of this ideology tend to claim. Social struggles are not a result of biological evolution and cannot be used to judge one’s value. Viewing sociology through the theories defined by an entirely different field of research is a nonsensical idea.
References
Spencer, H. (2021). Progress: Its law and causes. In Essays: Scientific, Political, and Speculative (pp. 8-62). Routledge.
Takács, K. (2018). Discounting of evolutionary explanations in sociology textbooks and curricula.Frontiers in Sociology, 3. Web.