HERBERT SPENCER
HERBERT SPENCER
BIOGRAPHY
- Herbert Spencer was born in a middle class family in Derby, England on 27th April.
- His father was a school master.
- Spencer
was the eldest of nine children and the only one to survive into adulthood.
This was perhaps one of the reason why he advocated the idea of the SURVIVAL OF
THE FITTEST in his theory of evolution.
- He
never get conventional education in school but was taught by his father and
uncle at home and get good training of mathematics.
- At
a young age he started working as an Engineer in the railroad.
- After
some time he changed his profession and become a journalist and started working
as an editor of the ECONOMIST.
- He
was a great friend of poet GEORGE ELIOT.
- In
1850 he published his first book SOCIAL STATICS.
- Spencer
was influenced by Charles Darwin’s book THE ORIGIN OF SPECIES(1859)
- He
also advocated the principle of LAISSEZ FAIRE or Free Market.
HIS SOCIAL
ENVIRONMENT
The turmoil around Spencer and around Comte was similar. So were the problems they faced. Apart from important differences, the two thinkers were largely similar in their interests and focus. Both believed deeply in progress and in the unity and irreversibility of historical development. This belief is also found in other great thinkers of this era, such as Karl Marx. The era to which these thinkers belonged was a century of Great Hope. Therefore, belief in the laws of the Progressive development of society is central to their arguments.
ORGANIC ANALOGY
Spencer
compared society to an organism. The biologists are concerned with the organic
evolution of the body while the sociologists are concerned with the evolution
of social structure, institution and organizations.
Society
can be compared to organisms in that both have three main systems. Spencer
found similarities between animal organisms and societies
|
SYSTEM |
ANIMALS |
SOCIETIES |
|
REGULATORY SYSTEM |
CENTRAL NERVOUS
SYSTEM |
GOVERNMENT |
|
SUSTAINING SYSTEM |
GIVING AND
RECEIVING NOURISHMENT |
INDUSTRY (MONEY,
JOBS, ECONOMY) |
|
DISTRIBUTION
SYSTEM |
VEINS AND ARTERIES |
ROADS,
TRANSPORTATION, INTERNET ETC. |
Spencer
maintained that ‘a society’ as an entity, is something more than and other than
an organism, even though human organisms (individuals) are members of it. it is
a total system of elements of social organization and their interdependent
functions. It is a super-organic entity, an organizational entity over and
above the level of the organism.
According to Spencer, society is not just a collection of several individuals, but is a
separate entity. The whole is greater than its parts. As a house is more than just a collection of bricks, wood and stone. It contains a specific
order of parts. The individualist Spencer, however, believed that unlike biological organisms, where parts exist for the benefit of the
whole, in society the whole exists for the benefit of the parts, i.e. the individuals in society.
A biological analogy compares a social process to the process of a biological organism. In his comparison, he says that for the benefit of the whole society, the parts of the society work in harmony like the parts of the human body. just as the dysfunction of any part of the body causes problems for the healthy functioning of an whole body organism, the dysfunction of any part of society threatens the entire social structure. In doing so, Spencer emphasized the need to analyze society in terms of structure and function and functional interdependence throughout the social system. In an attempt to explain society, he presented an analogy between the organism and society. The analogy can be better explained by highlighting some similarities between organism and society which are as follows:
- Both grow in size
- As society grows, the internal elements of structure differentiate in the same way the biological parts become complicated with growth.
- Both the systems interact with environment and make adjustment with the enviornmental factors.
- Every part of the system is interrelated with each other.
- The parts of a biological entity are physically tied to
one another but the parts of a society are free, they are not in a direct
organic contact.
- In society all the parts possess consciousness but in
biological entities consciousness is concentrated in one small part
- The parts or individuals in society can move from one
place to another. But biological entities cannot move around.
Spencer maintains that being elements of nature all are subjected to the forces of evolution and as such follow the principles of evolution
THE EVOLUTIONARY DOCTRINE OF HERBERT SPENCER
According to Herbert Spencer, all physical or social changes show a similar pattern and all such patterns are based on the principle of EVOLUTION. Spencer stated in the FIRST PRINCIPLE that evolution is a change from a relatively vague, incoherent, homogeneous state to a relatively defined, coherent and heterogeneous state.
Throughout the late 19th century, evolutionism dominated sociology. This concept was first developed by the German sociologist Von Baer, followed by Darwin, Spencer and others.
Spencer’s first and foremost concern was on the evolutionary changes of social structures and social institutions. He applied the evolutionary theory to the social world and rejected the religious explanations about its origin and structures. The basic principles of Social evolution are:
- Society is super-organic whole. By super-organic, Spencer meant that although human society consists of individuals, yet the society is external to individuals. By whole he meant that society is a system of interrelated parts. These interrelated systems interact with the physical environment.
- Society changes naturally over time and gradually becomes perfect in itself.
- Phases of growth of society are simple and homogenous.
- With the continuous process of differentiation the entire social structure becomes complex and integrated. The more the society becomes socially differentiated the more the parts and the institutions become dependent upon each other
- Once differentiation occurred there takes place a segregation of groups, classes and association. Thus differentiation and segregation in social growth follow a definite principle
- As a whole society responds to the changes that occur within it. When certain changes occur that begin to threaten the existing environment the social structure also undergoes changes accordingly to balance the situation.
Spencer defines evolution as a change from indefinite, incoherent homogeneity to a definite and coherent homogeneity through continuous differentiation and integration and he gave the concept of evolution in terms of
· Process of change where all things change from the simplest of the forms to the most complex
· Things which are relatively undifferentiated to the things which are differentiated which mean that one part is different from other. Example Amoeba which is undifferentiated and Human being which is differentiated
· Change from Homogenous (part look alike) to the Heterogeneous.
Spencer explained his idea of social evolution using examples from both physical and biological evolution. According to his biological evolution theory, the animals that made it through the battle for existence are the ones that can successfully adapt to changing conditions. Similarly the society is transitioning from a homogenous to a heterogenous structure, as well as from an indefinite to a definite stage. Similarly, Spencer extended the notion of biological evolution to the cultural perspective, indicating that societies that are able to adapt to changing conditions survive. If a civilisation is unable to adapt to changing conditions, it crumbles and eventually dies out. Spencer's theory of social development recognizes two stages:
The movement from simple to compound societies.
Change from militant society to industrial society.
The movement from simple to compound societies—This is seen in four types of societies in terms of evolutionary levels.
Simple Society:
Spencer referred to a "simple society" as "one which forms a single working whole un-subjected to any other and of which the parts co-operate with or without a regulating centre for certain public ends." These communities were mostly small, nomadic, and lacked a permanent relationship structure. They exhibited low levels of differentiation, specialization, and integration. Examples include the Eskimos, Fuegians, Guiana tribes, new Caledonians, and Pueblo Indians.
Compound Societies:
Compound societies were described as the result of either a peaceful or violent union of two or more basic societies. They tended to be generally settled agricultural societies, though the majority are primarily pastoral, with four or five social strata and an organized priestly order. They are also distinguished by industrial structures that demonstrate an advancement in general and local division of labor. Teutonic peoples from the fifth century, Homeric Greeks, New Zealanders, Hottentots Dahomans, and Ashantees are all examples.
Doubly Compound Societies:
Doubly compound societies had a bigger and more defined governmental structure, a religious hierarchy, a more or less rigorous caste system, and a more complicated division of labor. They were also totally settled. Additionally, tradition has increasingly become positive law in many civilizations, and religious practices have become more precise, complex, and intricate. There are more towns and highways, and knowledge and the arts have advanced significantly. Examples include the Spartan Confederacy, thirteenth-century France, eleventh-century England, and prehistoric Peruvians.
It includes “the great civilized nations” such as the Assyrian Empire, the modern Great Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Russia. Spencer does not outline their traits in detail but points to their increased overall size, complexity, division of labour, popular density, integration and general cultural complexity.
Change from Military Society to Industrial Society:
According to Spencer, evolution proceeds from military society to industrial society. The type of social structure depends on the relation of a society to other societies in its significant characteristics.
The military society is characterized by compulsory co-operation while the industrial society is based on voluntary co-operation.
The military society has a centralized government whereas the industrial society has a decentralized government.
Military society has economic autonomy but it is not found in industrial society.
There is the domination of the state over all other social organizations in the military society whereas in the industrial society the functions of the states are very much limited.
CRITICISM
- According to some social thinkers Herbert Spencer’s theory lacks practicability. It is not practical and realistic. Even today there are several tribes and aboriginals that do not show any sign of evolution.
- It also lacks uniformity. It is not possible to have a uniform pattern of Social evolution in all societies. Because the factors and circumstances responsible for evolution differ from one another.
- Mere survival for existence is not enough for man. In human societies qualities like sympathy, sacrifice, kindness, love etc. are also present.
- These are quite different from struggle for existence.
Comments