SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (David Levy)
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:18:23 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (39 lines)
----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
 
Surely the most influential use of the p-d before it was named 
was that which Malthus sprang on Godwin. Here is a nice statement of the 
issue 
from Godwin's 1801 response to Malthus and other critics: 
 
"It is true, the ill consequence of a numerous family will not come so 
coarsely 
home to each man's individual interest, as they do at present. It is true, 
a man 
in such a state of society might say, if my children cannot subsist at my 
expense, let them subsist at the expense of my neighbour." (1801, pp. 
61-62) 
 
Of course Godwin resisted the implication arguing for moral development. 
 
The nicest statement of the issue that I know comes in W. F. Lloyd 1837 
Whately lecture: 
 
"Now, the objection, drawn from the theory of population, against such 
systems 
of equality, is this. Marriage is a present good. The difficulties 
attending the 
maintenance of a family are future. But in a community of goods, where the 
children are maintained at public tables, or where each family takes 
according 
to its necessaries out of the common stock, these difficulties are removed 
from 
the individual. They spread themselves, and overflow the whole surface of 
society, and press equally on every part." (1837, p. 21) 
 
David Levy 
 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask] 
 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2