"Survival of the Fittest" What Does That Mean?

In today's blog, I want to ruminate on the term "Survival of the Fittest." In the '70's, I spent a fair amount of time reading about, and ruminating on, Darwin's theories, with which this phrase is commonly associated.

In actuality, the phrase was first "coined" by the British philosopher Herbert Spencer, who used it in his Principles of Biology (1864), written after reading Charles Darwin's, On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, (1859). This title was later reduced, on its sixth printing, to: On the Origin of Species.

The term Darwin actually used was, "natural selection." Spencer, in his writings drew parallels between his economic theories and those of Darwin's "Natural Selection." After the passing of 100 years, "survival of the fittest" has become, in the mind of the public, associated with Darwin's theories, but not the mind's of scholars, I have found out.

It was my conclusion back then that, while Darwin's ideas actually had to do with physical "fitness," that it had been subtly changed to justify Capitalism; Capitalism being the private ownership of the means of creating wealth. This leads to the idea that those who have the most money had obviously proven themselves the most fit. This, in turn, justified their power in the world.

We humans give much weight to the written word, (at least we used to) and particularly the words of "authorities." Back 100 years ago, a person was considered "cultured," and thus of the elite, if they had read A book, heard A live musical performance, taken A trip for any distance and come back, etc, etc.

If you had written a book that was published, you were obviously a person of authority. I write this to give an idea of the power a book had to influence people's thinking in those times. Darwin's book was published, and republished, at least six times. Major scientific conferences of the learned men of the times were convened in Europe to discuss those theories.

Individuals presenting alternative theories to the new idea, that species might be connected and, even, evolve into something else, lost out to Darwin's theories, which, I believed, back then, were able to be blurred into support of Capitalism made possible by the new methods of mass production through mechanization.

Currently, in the process of writing this blog, I am now convinced that this was deliberate. In the late 19th Century, interpretations of Darwin's theories regarding all species, credited to Herbert Spencer, were "evolved" into "Social Darwinism."

Social Darwinism is: "A belief, popular in the late Victorian era in England, America, and elsewhere, which states that the strongest or fittest should survive and flourish in society, while the weak and unfit should be allowed to die," (Wikipedia). Since I don't plan to read Spencer's works to find out what he actually wrote or implied, as I might have done back in the '70's, I will only say that "he has been interpreted to have written that..."

The focus on competition during this important time, obscured the, at least, equally important role that cooperation plays in survival, both within and between species. The role of cooperation in creature survival is still, to this day, given short shrift. One of the way this has been carried out is to equate "cooperation" with "Socialism," and we all know where that leads, don't we?

The term, "Survival of the fittest," is now commonly used in many ways, not intended by its original users, for example, in the Survivalist Movement in its many forms and as a descriptive, as well as people using it for it's humorous potential. This subtle shifting of well known sayings into different usage and mildly humorous ones is, in the process, increasingly embedded in our Belief Systems.

I am ending today's blog on that note.

Shirley Gallup