ELEVEN
The Ethologists’ UnpaidDebtsto Spencerand
Sumner
Spencer’s PoorWordChoiceWhenPioneeringBiology-BasedEconomics
No, HerbertSpencerand WilliamGrahamSumnerwerenot eugenicists.No, theydid
not demandthatdiseasesufferersandthe financiallydowntroddenhastentheirjourney
to the tomb.No, Spencerand Sumnerdid not proclaimthat no one but the wealthiestand
healthiestshouldbe ableto propagatetheirgenesto successivegenerations.Somereaders
maywonder,then,in whatmannerdid thesetwo intellectualsreallyapplythe theoriesof
biologicalevolutionto theirstudiesof society’s dynamics.I providedsomeof the answer
in BookTwo,but hereI can dispersethe rest of it. Theansweris thatbothSpencerand
Sumnerpioneeredin evolutionarypsychology,evolutionaryeconomics,and the theories
of complexadaptivesystemsandemergentcomplexity.Heart-wrenchingly,the leadin-
tellectualsin eachof thesedisciplinesseemreluctantto admitas much.
I arguethatSpencerandSumneranticipatedsomeaspectsof E. O. Wilson’s and
CharlesLumsden’s theoryof gene-cultureco-evolution.Andtheyfurtheranticipated
severalmoderninsightsabouteconomiesbeingnaturalecosystems.Disregardingsuch
facts,sundrythinkersin the evolutionary-psychologydisciplinepresentSpencer’s and
Sumner’s economicinsightsas theirownnewdiscoveriesas theysimultaneouslyexcori-
ate Spencerand Sumneras bigotedeugenicistswhohad no ideasof any valueto offer.
Thetwentiethcenturyboastssuchfree-marketevolutionistsas F. A. Hayek,JaneJa-
cobs,MichaelShermer,and MichaelRothschild.But a hundredyearspriorto thoseindi-
vidualsrisingto prominence,HerbertSpencerhad alreadyobservedthat a marketecono-
my is a vibrantecosystemthatfunctionsthroughspontaneousorder.Sadlythis achieve-
mentgoesunsungas a consequenceof someunfortunateterminologyon Spencer’s part.
WhenSpencerwantedto explainhowspontaneousorderwascommonamongpeaceful
societiesand violentshark-infestedwaters,he gropedfor a wordto describeeachof these
naturalenvironmentsandhabitats.Becausethe wordecosystemwasnot knownin his
time,Spencerinsteadoptedfororganism.
Of course,if one literallybelievedthata societyor economywasa singleorganism,
thenthatwouldimplythateverypersonlivingand participatingin societyis but a tiny,
expendablecell of a muchgreaterbeing.Werethatthe case,it wouldthusbe just for the
Stateto sacrificethe livesand rightsof individualsif doingso couldoverallstrengthenthe
muchlargersocialorganism.Spencerdid not intendto conveysucha message,as he
opposedsuchgovernism.But becausehe appliedthe wordorganisminsteadofecosystem
261