An Essay on the Principle of Population

“It has been said that the great question is now at issue, whether man shall henceforth start forwards with accelerated velocity toward illimitable, and hitherto unconceived improvement, or be condemned to a perpetual oscillation between happiness and misery, and after every effort remain still at an immeasurable distance for the wished-for goal.”

The issue highlighted above, that of the perfectibility of humankind, is discussed throughout Malthus’s entire work. This quote provides an important contextual cue, which indicates that the topic of societal progress was, in Malthus’s time, a widely discussed topic. Although it is not seen in this quote, Malthus later engages the writings of Marquis de Condorcet and William Godwin, who are both proponents of progress.

“The advocate for the present order of things is apt to treat the sect of speculative philosophers either as a set of artful and designing knaves [...] or as wild and mad-headed enthusiasts whose silly speculations and absurd paradoxes are not worthy of attention of any reasonable man.” 

This quote evidences one side of the equation on the topic of societal progress. The conservative faction, who are unimpressed by the methodology and optimistic outlook of the progressives, seek to paint them as unscientific. Malthus demonstrates through this passage his acute observation of the back-and-forth between his contemporaries.

“The advocate for the perfectibility of man, and of society, retorts on the defender of establishments a more than equal contempt. He brands him as a slave of the most miserable and narrow prejudices; or as the defender of the abuses of civil society only because he profits by them.” 

Immediately following the previous quote, Malthus highlights the other side of the debate on the topic of societal progress. Those who believe in perfectibility accuse conservatives of upholding an unfair status quo from which they derive personal gain. Although this quote is mainly descriptive, Malthus later parrots some of the conservative faction’s reservations about progressivists.

“In this unamicable contest the cause of truth cannot but suffer. The really good arguments on each side of the question are not allowed to have their proper weight. Each pursues his own theory, little solicitous to correct or improve it by an attention to what is advanced by his opponents.” 

In this passage, Malthus laments the lack of genuine dialogue between the conservative and progressive factions regarding the topic of human progress. The pettiness of their disagreement hinders any real attempt at finding the truth. It can be inferred that Malthus’s essay will attempt to bridge this gap by returning to the fundamentals of scientific and philosophical inquiry, which value the observation of factual evidence.

“I think I may fairly make two postulata. First, [t]hat food is necessary to the existence of man. Secondly, [t]hat the passion between the sexes is necessary and will remain nearly in its present state. These two laws, ever since we have had any knowledge of mankind, appear to have been fixed laws of our nature, and, as we have not hitherto seen any alteration in them, we have no right to conclude that they will ever cease to be what they now are [...]” 

Here, Malthus clearly lists the two fundamental premises that comprise his theory on population growth. The first states that humans need food to live. It is simple and plausible. The second establishes that the passion between the sexes—human reproduction-–has remained a universal constant in human history and therefore is likely to stay this way henceforth. These are the main elements in Malthusian theory.

“Assuming then, my postulata as granted, I say, that the power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man.” 

This quote is another fundamental element of Malthusian theory. It states that population will always increase at a faster rate than food production. It is the single thread underneath all aspects of Malthus’s philosophical framework.

“Population, when unchecked, increases in a geometrical ratio. Subsistence increases only in an arithmetical ratio. A slight acquaintance with numbers will shew the immensity of the first power in comparison to the second.”

This passage expounds the idea that population grows exponentially while subsistence only grows at a linear rate. It can be inferred that although food production may for a time be sufficient, population will sooner than later outpace its capacity to support itself. Although Malthus does not describe his theory as defeatist, it is evident in this quote that no significant progress can be made to improve society in the long run.

“In a state therefore of great equality and virtue, where pure and simple manners prevailed, and where the means of subsistence were so abundant that no part of society could have any fears about providing amply for a family, the power of population being left to exert itself unchecked, the increase of the human species would evidently be much greater than any increase that has been hitherto known.”

Malthus imagines a world in which resources were abundant and people could easily raise families. He concludes that in such a virtuous society (where marriage and bearing children are seen in a positive light), and where the basic need of subsistence is provided for, people would inevitably bear more children and birth rates would explode. This is an assumption that is not subsequently defended in depth because Malthus illustrates it as an unshakable truth.

“In the rudest state of mankind, in which hunting is the principal occupation, and the only mode of acquiring food, the means of subsistence being scattered over a large extent of territory, the comparative population must necessarily be thin.” 

This passage paints human progress as having undergone multiple stages. The first state, that of hunter-gatherers, is inefficient in terms of food production. Malthus concludes therefore that such societies are not as populated as others who live a sedentary lifestyle.

“In the controversy concerning the populousness of ancient and modern nations, could it be clearly ascertained that the average produce of the countries in question, taken together, is greater now than it was in the times of Julius Caesar, the dispute would be at once determined.” 

This quote is interesting because it highlights the lack of quantitative evidence available to Malthus at the time. His knowledge of hunter-gatherer societies notwithstanding, even censuses on the populousness of European countries then and now are scarcely to be found. Malthus’s essay, being a product of its time, is more often based in crude observations than in solid data.

“The positive check to population, by which I mean the check that represses an increase which is already begun, is confined chiefly, though not perhaps solely, to the lowest orders of society.”

Population checks are another term often repeated in Malthus’s essay. Positive checks are events that increase mortality rate and halt population growth. This passage declares that they chiefly affect the lower classes; Malthus later argues that epidemics and natural disasters often affect lower income groups harder.

“It has been universally remarked that all new colonies settled in healthy countries, where there was plenty of room and food, have constantly increased with astonishing rapidity in their population.”

This quote once again evidences Malthus’s lack of quantitative data. It asserts that all new colonies have seen an increase in population due to the expanded territory and the abundance of resources but provides no numerical evidence. Although this is frowned upon nowadays, it was standard practice in Malthus’s time for lack of systematic data collection.

“The only true criterion of a real and permanent increase in the population of any country is the increase of the means of subsistence.”

This quote by itself evidences Malthusian theory. However, when seen in the context of Chapter 7, an additional layer of depth can be glimpsed: Malthus argues that great epidemics and natural disasters only temporarily decrease the size of population, but if food is abundant enough the numbers will spring back up within five years.

“Were every man sure of a comfortable provision for his family, almost every man would have one, and were the rising generation free from the ‘killing frost’ of misery, population must rapidly increase.”

In this passage, Malthus presumes the inevitability of increased childbirth when paired with financial opulence. In hindsight, it clearly needs additional evidence to withstand scrutiny. However, it also demonstrates a significantly different societal attitude toward contraception in Malthus’s time.

“The wildest and most improbable conjectures may be advanced with as much certainty as the most just and sublime theories, founded on careful and reiterated experiments. We may return again to the old mode of philosophising and make facts bend to systems, instead of establishing system upon facts.” 

This quote is a critique of Condorcet’s methodology, which Malthus finds to be unscientific. It declares that observable facts need to form the bedrock of any philosophical system and conjectures are fanciful and fallacious.

There can be little doubt that the equalization of property which we have supposed, added to the circumstance of the labour of the whole community being directed chiefly to agriculture, would tend greatly to augment the produce of the country.” 

Malthus proposes in this passage the allocation of labor to growing produce as a means to support the population. He also believes that an equal distribution of land can add to the growth of agricultural yields. However, within the larger context of Chapter 10, this passage serves to illustrate how intensive labor is compared to the relative ease with which population grows.

“It will be said, perhaps, that many discoveries have already taken place in the world that were totally unforeseen and unexpected. This is grant to be true; but if a person had predicted these discoveries without being guided by any analogies or indications from past facts, he would deserve the name of seer or prophet, but not of philosopher.” 

This quote evidences Malthus’s approach to philosophy. He firmly believes in the scientific process and defends philosophy as part of this system. Therefore, he disdains theories built upon what he considers wild speculation that is justified only by calling upon unrelated precedence.

“The only way that a poor man has of supporting himself in independence is by the exertion of his bodily strength. This is the only commodity he has to give in exchange for the necessaries of life. It would hardly appear then that you benefit him by narrowing the market for his commodity, by decreasing the demand for labour, and lessening the value of the only property that he possesses.” 

In this passage, Malthus is arguing against an equal society seeped in endless resources and without any class divide proposed by William Godwin. His reasoning is that resources are by nature scarce rather than abundant, and for the lower classes to earn their fair share of this commodity, they must use the only tool at their disposal: their labor. Without a higher class capable of paying them wages, they would be reduced to a state of idleness and misery.

“Little or no doubt can exist that the comforts of the labouring poor depend upon the increase of the funds destined for the maintenance of labour, and will be very exactly in proportion to the rapidity of this increase [...] but it will not be a real and effectual fund for the maintenance of an additional number of labourers, unless the whole, or at least a great part of this increase of the stock or revenue of society, be convertible into a proportional quantity of provisions.” 

Malthus declares that the working class can see their living conditions improved if they are paid higher wages. However, this also means their employer (and society as a whole) must set aside a larger portion of their revenue to pay their workers. Most importantly, these funds are only useful if they are accompanied by an increase in food production, which will prevent living costs from raising above the pay raise. Malthus believes that the working class may see their quality of life improved only when all these conditions are met.

“The present system of grating, undoubtedly tends more than the former system [of tilling] to diminish the quantity of human subsistence in the country, in proportion to the general fertility of the land.”

This is a thread defended at various points throughout the essay. Malthus believes tilled land yields the highest ratio of food, whereas grazed land are less efficient. Although he does not advocate for the complete conversion of all fertile land into agricultural spaces, he does speculate that such a change would bring about a boom in population.

“A capital employed upon land may be unproductive to the individual that employs it and yet be highly productive to the society. A capital employed in trade, on the contrary, may be highly productive to the individual, and yet be almost totally unproductive to the society.”

In this quote, Malthus directly challenges Adam Smith’s theory on how to measure the wealth of a nation. Malthus argues that Smith does not properly separate commodities from consumables. A society that is enriched from trading luxury goods may score high on wealth, but Malthus does not believe it can be rich in the same way as another nation that produces the same value of food.

“The moment we allow ourselves to ask why some things are not otherwise, instead of endeavouring to account for them as they are, we shall never know where to stop, we shall be led into the grossest and most childish absurdities, all progress in the knowledge of the ways of Providence must necessarily be at an end, and the study will even cease to be an improving exercise of the human mind.”

In this quote, Malthus once again implores his contemporaries to return to the fundamentals of modern philosophical reasoning, which value observation of facts and logical reasoning above all else. He disagrees with the trend of speculating upon the distant future in an unscientific manner. Though he does not name anyone specific, his earlier critiques of Condorcet and Godwin imply a certain bias against overly optimistic progressivists.

“The first great awakeners of the mind seem to be the wants of the body. [...] The savage would slumber for ever under his tree unless he were roused from his torpor by the cravings of hunger or the pinchings of cold, and the exertions that he makes to avoid these evils, by procuring food, and building himself a covering, are the exercises which form and keep in motion his faculties, which otherwise would sink into listless inactivity.”

In this passage, Malthus imagines mankind (and especially the unrefined “savages”) as innately lazy. Without pain and misery brought upon them by their bodies and the elements, they would prefer to idle around rather than improve themselves. This belief carries through the rest of Malthus’s work and provides the groundwork for his negative attitude toward charity.