An Essay on the Principle of Population

In Chapter 17, Malthus argues in tandem with contemporary French economists that labor used in manufacturing is unproductive compared to labor used on food production. The latter is a better indicator of the aggregate happiness of a society whereas the former may not contribute to the welfare of the lower classes. This is because, according to the French economists, land labor produces enough for the farmer to consume and to pay rent to his landlord, whereas manufacturing non-consumable goods usually only covers the cost of food consumed by the laborer. Malthus finds fault with this reasoning: after all, if the finished product is worth more than the cost of food it took to make it, the additional profit may be considered equally productive for the growth of a nation.

Malthus’s reasoning is different because he assigns importance to the improvement of living conditions for the lower class. Capital employed in cultivating the land is highly productive for a society but might not enrich the individual. Meanwhile, trade may be highly profitable for the individual but unproductive to society. While luxury goods like laces and trinkets are valuable to the rich and are part of the indicator of the wealth of a nation, they do not improve the livelihoods of the poor because they cannot support their subsistence the same way an increase in food production could. The same is true for foreign trade, which, according to Smith, enriches a nation, but Malthus believes it only affects the country’s external influence and contributes little to the domestic maintenance of labor and the increase of happiness of the lower classes. He suspects that the use of land for grazing and animal husbandry has prevented many parts of Europe from effective food production and greater population growth.

Price’s work, Observations on Civil Liberty and the Justice and Policy of the War with America, speculates that general happiness increases most during the first stage of civilization. Young nations like the United States fall squarely into this category. Malthus agrees with the assessment on the happy situation in America but attributes this to the abundance of fertile and uncultivated land rather than the nation’s short history. While the lower classes in America are much better off than their counterparts in other countries, this situation cannot last indefinitely. Europe might have entered a “premature old age” for encouraging industries in towns rather than in the countryside, but the introduction of such manufacturing is inevitable. The production of the land cannot support population growth indefinitely, and humankind will always tend to increase beyond their means of subsistence.

Malthus defends his methodology in Chapter 18. Reasoning must be done “from nature up to nature’s God” and not “from God to nature” (110-111). In other words, the logic behind all things must be accounted for through observation; speculation about why God made them is presumptuous and fruitless. Through his own observations, Malthus finds that life is not free from pain and imperfection, and not all beings are capable of equal wisdom and goodness. Therefore, he finds it pointless to imagine a world in which God spontaneously creates a utopian world. Malthus maintains that mankind approaches God only in analyzing the nature he created, and through observation he realizes changes happen over time. He imagines the purpose of living as God’s will to imbue intelligence into a body made of infinite matter.

Malthus finds it useless to speculate about whether the mind is distinct from matter. He believes it is only a question of semantics. After all, every observation points to the mind being linked to the body, both of which grow together through infancy, with God as their ultimate creator. Thus, mind and body are created with whatever matter God used to make humans. More importantly, the mind is awakened first by the wants of the body. Malthus believes that a “savage” would sleep under a tree forever if it were not for hunger or cold pushing him to hunt for food or seek shelter. He concludes that necessity is “the mother of invention” (113), and people are pushed toward improving themselves when their bodies require them to do so. Malthus parrots philosopher John Locke in pointing out that people are more likely to act to avoid pain than seek pleasure.

God has ordained that no great amount of food shall be produced unless people use physical labor and mental ingenuity to cultivate it. Therefore, food, being essential in sustaining life, pushes people to greater exertion than any other want. This mandatory exertion is to rouse the human mind from inertia. Then, God ordains that population must grow faster than food to further push their limits and avoid complacency. Malthus admits this divine ordinance may produce some evil, but upon closer inspection, these drawbacks are completely overshadowed by good. The natural law of exponential population growth and linear food production is universally consistent and pushes people toward perfecting themselves. Had food grown in abundance, mankind may have never evolved from “the savage state” (115).

Malthus finds it impossible to imagine a society without richness and poverty. However, the right mode of government could reduce the number of people in the extreme regions. The middle class, being comfortable enough to enjoy some leisure but not rich enough for idleness, is the most animated and most favorable to intellectual growth. However, without the extremities, society, like a tree without branches, could crumble. This is Malthus’s conclusion after observing mankind as a whole.

Chapter 19 defends the idea that all individuals are unique and capable of improvement if given the incentive. Therefore, abundance and prosperity, which push people toward idleness, degrade the human character. Malthus describes his philosophical outlook as follows: first, compassion and kindness are traits found in all ranks of society and are more likely born than learned. Second, people born with talent can commit evil or good to the extent of their capabilities, and moral corruption must coexist with moral excellence to make sense of either. Finally, the desire for knowledge is roused by the wants of the body, which, along with passion, pushes people to activity.

Nature is infinitely diverse, which is why it necessarily has inferior parts. However, it is also this diversity that allows it to produce the greatest quantities of good. Nature is adapted to further the purpose of God in creating the world. Even metaphysical subjects, which may never be fully known to men, exist to help them engage with deeper intellectual thought. With time, men will continue to accumulate knowledge. The brightest of minds will not simply parrot information but also “form new combinations” for further discoveries. If a divine revelation were to remove all mysteries of the world, it would not create a utopian world but would rather encourage people toward intellectual idleness. Malthus therefore does not believe the scriptures to possess such information and maintains that labor and suffering are essential to life. He declares the doctrine of granting everlasting life to the virtuous and death to the sinful is “in every respect just and merciful, and worthy of the great Creator” (123).

After an exploration of the purpose and rhythm of life, Malthus concludes that life is a blessing in and of itself. Therefore, even though suffering is inherently part of life, and some lead lives of misery, this is a small drawback relative to the aggregate happiness created through this system. Malthus does not presume to say this is the only way God could have created the world, but he also dismisses the idea of exploring alternatives as fruitless since he cannot know God’s intentions. Given the necessity of food to maintain life, men must labor, and given the scarcity of resources and the superior power of population growth, there can never be a state of permanent abundance. In sum, the existence of moral good and evil arise from this principle of population. The purpose of evil is to generate activity. The more people exert themselves in preventing evil for themselves and their societies, the closer they are to fulfilling the will of God.