Survival of the Fittest and the Origin of Social Darwinism (Article Critique Sample)

Student Name Instructor’s Name Course Number Date The "Survival of the Fittest" and the Origin of Social Darwinism The author of this article is refuting the authenticity and applicability of "survival of the fittest" as a mantra supporting speciation as evidence for evolution advanced by Darwin. He argues that "Survival of the fittest" is a term coined to perpetuate political, economic and social superiority by some people over others. He gives several illustrations in support of his argument. Firstly, he argues that Natural science did not inform the motive behind Darwin's writing but the prevailing circumstances between 1860 and 1945 in Europe (Claeys 223-227). The author states that this is a period that most countries in Europe were fighting for superiority something that resulted in war. He further says the term "survival of the fittest" was coined by Herbert Spencer in 1852, contrary to what many of us are made to believe. He further notes that "Origin of Species" where Darwin borrows a lot had existed for over 50 years by the time it became popular in 1859 (Claeys 228). The facts that Darwin was more influential in Europe made his ideology get used metaphorically by those who wanted to rule others. Secondly, the author states that ‘Survival of the fittest" is used as means of achieving commercial milestones as people were scrambling for the limited resources (Claeys 230-235). He argues that it emerged that there are those members of the society who were productive and unproductive. The productive ones are described as the "fittest" whereas the unproductive are said to be "unfit." The notion by Malthus, Universal Struggle for Existence, gained momentum after the publication of "Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith. It was interpreted that the "fit" class was composed of those who could maintain a competitive edge over their neighbors. This ideology made the manufacturers who could add value to durable goods and laborers stronger than landlords. The author concludes by saying that those who could not compete died out while those who adapted their skills survived. Finally, the author argues that this slogan was used to promote social classes and racism (Claeys 235-240. He states that it emerged that those who favorably competed were said to be fit, valuable members of the society, most useful, productive, treated as those who ought to survives and mostly treated with respect and associated with intelligence. The author uses the term ’Species" which was interpreted to mean a race to expound on racism. He states that the whites who had "a common ancestry" were more superior to non-whites, evidenced by their strong political institutions, cultural and economic performance. This perception was borrowed from Darwin’s proof of speciation; Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny (Darwin 1606). As such, the superior races would survive while the inferior ones would become extinct. In my opinion, I tend to side with the author. Leaders in Europe met in Berlin, Germany in 1885 to discuss how they would sha...