Essay on the Principle of Population
Table of Contents
The question on the future of mankind arose from:
- the many recent discoveries in natural philosophy
- the increasing diffusion of general knowledge from the extension of printing
- the French Revolution, which, like a blazing comet could inspire with fresh life and vigour, or scorch up and destroy the shrinking inhabitants of the earth
Will man henceforth start forwards with accelerated velocity towards unlimited improvement?
Or will he be condemned to a perpetual oscillation between happiness and misery?
The advocate for the present order of things is treats speculative philosophers as either:
- artful knaves, or
- wild and mad-headed enthusiasts
The advocate for the perfection of man and of society equally condemns the defender of establishments.
He brands him as:
- the slave of the most narrow prejudices
- the defender of the abuses of civil society only because he profits by them.
The friend of the present order of things condemns all political speculations.
The speculative philosopher equally offends against the cause of truth.
He envisions a happier state of society. So he attacks the present establishment.
A just theory will always be confirmed by experiment.
Yet so much friction and minute circumstances occur in practice. This makes theories difficult to be judged.
The most important argument that I shall adduce is not new. The principles on which it depends have been explained in part by Hume, and more at large by Adam Smith.
I have 2 postulates:
-
Food is necessary to the existence of man
-
The passion between the sexes is necessary and will remain nearly in its present state.
These 2 laws have been fixed laws of our nature.
I do not know that any writer has supposed that on this earth man will ultimately be able to live without food.
Mr Godwin has conjectured that the passion between the sexes may in time be extinguished.
But the passion between the sexes has stayed the same as it was 4,000 years ago.
Assuming my postulata as granted, then the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man.
Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometrical ratio.
Subsistence increases only in an arithmetical ratio.
The effects of these two unequal powers must be kept equal.*