Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Andy Denis (2003)
Publisher: Department of Economics, City University London
Types: Article
Subjects: malthus, rhetoric, reductionism, holism, ontology, policy prescription, invisible hand, providentialism, HB, B1
jel: jel:B12, jel:B31, jel:B41
This paper forms part of a research project investigating conceptions of the relationship between micro-level self-seeking agent behaviour and the desirability or otherwise of the resulting macro-level social outcomes in the history of economics. I identify two kinds of conservative rhetorical strategy, characterised by reductionism, and by holism plus an invisible hand mechanism, respectively. The present paper extends this study to Malthus, focusing on the various editions of his Essay on Population and his Summary View of the Principle of Population. Like the reductionist (Friedman, Lucas) and holistic (Smith, Hayek) proponents of laissez-faire, Malthus, too, is a defender of ‘the present order of things’ and an advocate of dependence on spontaneous forces. Malthus starts out within the eighteenth-century providentialist paradigm epitomised by Adam Smith and Dugald Stewart, but he later abandoned providentialism, adopting a more reductionist standpoint. Like Smith and Stewart, he takes a conservative political stance and opposes radical reform of society. But in taking up the arguments of the leading reformers of the day, Godwin and Condorcet, he is drawn by the logic of his argument to a position very far removed from Smith’s stoic optimism. The weapon he deploys against the reformers is the principle of population, by means of which he is able to portray the present state of society as something natural, eternal and inevitable, something in common with the animal and vegetable kingdoms. Though a potent weapon against the utopians, at the same time the principle of population undermines providentialism In the First Essay he tries to mitigate this by presenting a theodicy to reconcile his theory with a version of providentialism, but within weeks of publication he begins work on its replacement, a secular and reductionist argument that individual self-interest can guide us to socially desirable outcomes.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Becker C.L. 1932, The Heavenly City of the Eighteenth-Century Philosophers, New Haven and London, Yale UP.
    • Denis A. 1999, “Was Adam Smith an Individualist?”, History of the Human Sciences, 12, 3, 71-86.
    • Denis A.M.P. 2001, Collective and Individual Rationality: Some Episodes in the History of Economic Thought, Ph.D.
    • Denis A. 2002, “Was Hayek a Panglossian evolutionary theorist? A reply to Whitman”, Constitutional Political Economy, 13, 3, 275-285.
    • Denis A. 2004, “Two rhetorical strategies of laissez-faire”, Journal of Economic Methodology, 11, 3, 341-353.
    • Denis A. 2005, “The Invisible Hand of God in Adam Smith”, Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, 23-A, 1-33.
    • Flew A. 1970, “Introduction”, in Malthus 970.
    • Hayek F. 1988, The Fatal Conceit: the errors of socialism, London, Routledge.
    • James P. 1979, Population Malthus: his life and times, London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.
    • Keynes J.M. 1981, Activities 1929-31. Rethinking Employment and Unemployment Policies, in D. Moggridge (ed.), The Collected Writings of John Maynard Keynes, vol. XX, London, Macmillan, for the Royal Economic Society.
    • Lucas R.E. Jr. 1987, Models of Business Cycles, Oxford, Blackwell.
    • Malthus T.R. 1798, “Letter from The Rev. R. Malthus to William Godwin, Allbury, August 20”, in Ch. Kegan Paul, William Godwin: His Friends and Contemporaries, vol. I, London, 1876, 321-325.
    • Malthus T.R. 1803, An Essay on the Principle of Population 2nd edn., London: J. Johnson; repr. 1996, London, Routledge-Thoemmes Press.
    • Malthus T.R.* 1808, “Newenham and others on the State of Ireland”, Edinburgh Review, 12, 24, July.
    • Malthus T.R. 1958 (1803, 1806, 1807, 1817, 1826), An essay on the principle of population, in two vols, London, Dent/Everyman's Library; [referred to as the Second Essay in this paper].
    • Malthus T.R. 1970 (*1798, 1830), An essay on the principle of population and a summary view of the principle of population, ed. by Antony Flew, Harmondsworth, Penguin (Pelican Classics); [referred to as the First Essay and the Summary View in this paper].
    • Poovey M. 1998, A History of the Modern Fact. Problems of Knowledge in the Sciences of Wealth and Society, Chicago, Chicago UP.
    • Pullen J.M. 1981, “Malthus' theological ideas and their influence on his principle of population”, History of Political Economy, 13, 1, 39-54.
    • Santurri E.N. 1982, “Theodicy and social policy in Malthus' thought”, Journal of the History of Ideas, 43, 2, 315-330.
    • Smith A. 1976a (1759), The Theory of Moral Sentiments, in D. D. Raphael and A. L. Macfie (eds), The Glasgow Edition of the Works and Correspondence of Adam Smith, vol. I, Oxford, Clarendon Press-OUP; repr. Indianapolis, Liberty Fund, 1984.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article