50 pages • 1 hour read
Thomas MalthusAn Essay on the Principle of Population
Nonfiction | Book | Adult | Published in 1798A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.
Chapters 6-9Chapter Summaries & Analyses
Chapter 6 Summary
Chapter 6 analyzes the factors that enable exponential population growth in new colonies. An abundance of land and food enabled European settlements in the new world to multiply in number within a very short time. Among them, the United States grew the fastest because, unlike the Spanish settlements in Mexico, Peru, and Quinto, and the Portuguese colony in Brazil, America’s political institutions allow its citizens a greater degree of freedom and equality. Their property laws also promoted the distribution and effective use of land. Citing the data provided by mathematician Richard Price (1723-1791) in his work, Observations on the Nature of Civil Liberty, the Principles of Government, and the Justice and Policy of the War with America, Malthus observes the unprecedented growth in population in America. From an initial settlement of 21,200 people in 1643, their numbers doubled to half a million in 1760. In New Jersey, population doubles every 20 years whereas in the countryside it does the same every 15 years. Along the coast, the population doubles every 35 years.
Although it may seem that everyone is relatively well off in America despite the increase in population, Malthus insists this does not mean food production increases in a geometrical (exponential) ratio. Rather, there is an abundance of fertile land ready for use, like a reservoir, which can support the increase in population. When this reserve is depleted, any subsequent increase in food production will depend on the optimization of agricultural production, which can only bring diminishing returns in the long run. In contrast, population can grow indefinitely, as long as it is provided with enough food to live. In other words, population increase is inversely proportional to its preventive and positive checks.
It has been observed that emigration is often favorable to population growth in the mother country. Nevertheless, Great Britain cannot observe the same growth rates as America because of misery: the mother country lacks room and food to support an inflated number of people. In contrast, vices such as war, pestilence, or natural disasters often do not affect population growth for long. For example, the decrease in population caused by the plague in London in 1666 was no longer observable within 15 to 20 years. In sum, Malthus proposes that tyranny and oppression, which discourage agriculture, negatively affect population growth much more than natural disasters.
Chapter 7 Summary
In Chapter 7, Malthus uses demographer Johann Peter Süssmilch’s quantitative data to further prove his theory. Although the chapter includes several tables on population growth, Malthus does not provide an in-depth analysis of what the numbers entail. He remarks that epidemics significantly reduced population size in the Kingdom of Prussia in 1709-1710 and again in 1736-1737. However, the greatest proportion of births to burials happened within five years of these epidemics, which seems to indicate that the increased growth rates after tragic events will balance out the loss of lives.
However, Malthus remarks that prior to these epidemics, Prussia already increased rather quickly for an old state. Population growth happened at an unsustainable speed, which contributed to a worsening of living conditions and exacerbated the epidemics. The causes of such a rapid increase can be numerous, such as an improvement in agricultural yield and the encouragement of early marriage. In such cases, population growth tends to outlast the temporary benefits provided by the amelioration of living conditions, and positive checks are once more necessary to keep people from multiplying too fast. This vicious cycle causes periodical plagues in certain countries.
Malthus agrees with scholar Thomas Short that population growth in England happened at a faster pace in earlier periods due to having more unused land. If this is the case, he speculates there must have been plagues that caused an accelerated growth immediately afterward. Whereas England and France had a births to burials ratio of 124 to 100 in the previous century, they are presently situated around 111 to 100. This suggests that population growth is approximating the average rate of food production in these two countries. In comparison, the ratio of births to burials in New Jersey is 300 to 100. This is not miraculous but another proof that an abundance of food and other means of subsistence are the sole causes for a permanent increase in population. China, meanwhile, forced its increase by making everyone decrease their average consumption. This is why it must necessarily be subject to famines to keep population growth in check.
In America, an overabundance of resources allows all labor to be handsomely rewarded, therefore even if there were to be a famine, Malthus finds it hard to imagine prolonged suffering. Nevertheless, this exponential growth cannot be indefinitely sustained once resources are used up. America’s growth rates will one day parallel Europe’s. Malthus realizes some rulers might find it in their interest to increase population for cheaper labor. However, he cautions against doing so, as lower classes will suffer, and the increase will not be permanent unless there are adequate funds to support this change. This is precisely the problem of the Poor Bill, which encourages the conception of children without anticipating measures to support population growth.
In sum, unless population is decreasing, it can be inferred that food production must be adequate to sustain the present number of people. A country’s happiness is greatest when population growth approximates the rate of food production. This balance is accompanied by liberal laws and a free market. Malthus concludes that quality of life depends on people’s purchasing power.
Chapter 8 Summary
This chapter begins by reiterating that population growth will necessarily increase much faster than cultivation methods can be improved. The only checks to it are vice and misery. Malthus then embarks on a critique of Esquisse d’un Tableau Historique des Progrès de l’Esprit Humain by French philosopher Marquis de Condorcet. In this paper, Condorcet argues that the working class is especially vulnerable to misery because hard labor is their sole means of subsistence. In other words, without their physical strength, they are susceptible to fall into severe poverty. Condorcet thus proposes to establish a fund with the savings of individuals who never used them to help the most vulnerable.
Malthus disagrees with this measure on several grounds. First, Condorcet believes the working class is necessary to every nation because they are productive, thus he wishes to provide them with funds in cases of emergency. According to Malthus, such systems of charity encourage laziness, which clearly are at odds with Condorcet’s intentions. Second, even if Malthus is wrong and productivity remains the same, the comforts provided by the funds will encourage the working class to have more children, causing an increase in population and a decrease in living standards. This again defeats the purpose of the funds.
Although Condorcet is aware this could be a problem, he believes it is something that will happen in the distant future. The speed of human progress might yet offset these concerns. Malthus, however, insists population has already exceeded the means of subsistence in the present age and periodical bouts of misery attest to that. Condorcet believes that humanity may progress to let go of past superstitions. Therefore, should the world become overpopulated, a system of concubinage could prevent excessive births. Malthus finds this practice “promiscuous” and vile. It destroys the virtue and purity of manners of humankind.
Chapter 9 Summary
Chapter 9 explores another question raised by Condorcet: the organic perfectibility of mankind. What if an amelioration of the quality of food, of medicine, and of living conditions improves the natural faculties of men? Condorcet speculates that although immortality might be out of reach, life might yet be extended almost indefinitely. Malthus disagrees by pointing out that human life expectancy has not changed much throughout history, despite significant improvements in living standards. He laments that science should be based on facts rather than optimistic projections of the future. He does not reject that tremendous progress might enact change, but he insists that they cannot be inferred from reasoning alone. After all, he argues that breeding programs for Leicestershire sheep might have made their heads and legs smaller over the years, yet none are ever expected to be born without either. Malthus insists there is a limit to improvement even if he cannot pinpoint where it is.
Ultimately, Malthus argues that human improvement and the human condition can only be known through experience. Men are mortal because this has been invariably true throughout history and because the materials that make up his body are eventually subject to decay. It is fallacious to believe in unlimited progress merely after observing some partial improvement, the limits of which are completely unknown. Malthus insists that a careful investigation of this subject is necessary, even though it may appear self-evident that humans are mortals. This is because the theory itself has been proposed by experts in the field, who may be more receptive to criticism if their theories are properly acknowledged and systematically challenged. This trend of unscientific and illogical speculation might have been caused by the great discoveries of the time. Malthus thus softens his critique of Condorcet by allowing that his mistake is shared by many literary men and thus worthy of attention.
Chapters 6-9 Analysis
Chapters 6 and 7 are notable for being the only instances where Malthus uses hard data to support his theory. Chapter 6 references the work of Richard Price on population growth in America and Chapter 7 uses Johann Peter Süssmilch’s data on the demography of Prussia in the 18th century. Although they are referenced, Malthus does not analyze or critique any of these sets of data in depth. In the section on America, Malthus simply reprises the theory that population doubled every 25 years in some areas while in others people multiplied even faster. This sole statistic fuels his argument on the superior power of population growth: this is because, logically, agricultural yields cannot grow exponentially year after year once all land is used. Therefore, Malthus concludes even America cannot indefinitely sustain its current growth rate, and once all fertile land is occupied, it will face the same preventive and positive checks to population as the Old World.
In the next chapter, Malthus once again engages very little with the statistical tables he cites. Despite including several tables of hard data on population growth in 18th century Prussia, the main text never directly quotes these numbers and often glosses over the precise years indicated by the tables. Instead, Malthus directly declares that the ratio of births to burials tends to increase after epidemics, which indicates that while natural disasters may act as positive checks to population, if there is a surplus of food, then population will always grow to match it.
Chapters 8 and 9 critique Esquisse d’un Tableau Historique des Progrès de l’Esprit Humain written by Marquis de Condorcet. Its primary purpose is to once again dispel the optimistic idea that funds and charity provide any relief to the lower class. Malthus’s disdain for Condorcet’s idea of a relief fund for workers stems from the same reasoning he listed in Chapter 5. According to him, donating money is but a temporary fix to extreme poverty. The extra income given to the poor increases their purchasing power without a proportional growth in the supply of food. Thus, poor relief funds will inevitably be canceled out by a rapid inflation in the price of food. Once again, Malthus emphasizes the importance of food production above all else for the welfare of the lower classes. Later, Malthus challenges Condorcet’s concept of the infinite perfectibility of mankind. He chastises the philosopher for being too fanciful in his reasoning. Instead of observing facts, which clearly demonstrate the mortality of mankind throughout the ages, he engages in wishful thinking and passes it for logical reasoning. Although Malthus disagrees with Condorcet’s methodology, he softens his critique by declaring that works written by brilliant men should be given proper attention. Although subtle, these last two chapters demonstrate that Malthus has yet to establish himself as an authority in the field. His critique of other authoritative figures is staunch but written with some subtlety.
