Communications in Humanities Research ISSN: 2753-7072
Home> Volumes> Volume CHR Vol.121> Article
Research Article

Science, Morality, and Inequality: Rethinking Social Darwinism in Gilded Age America

Zixuan Qiu*
Basis International School Shenzhen

* Corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

Social Darwinism in the Gilded Age in America attempts to interpret social order through evolutionary science. Classical interpretations, most notably Hofstadter, have understood Social Darwinism as an ideology that justified capitalism and social inequality. Revisionist scholarship has complicated this view by questioning the coherence of social Darwinism as a category, and by showing that evolutionary language was politically flexible and not confined to conservative defense of capitalism. Building on those debates, this paper argues that the significance of social Darwinism lay not only in the sophisticated ideologies that it supported, but in the authority that evolutionary language acquired when applied to social life. By reviewing classical and revisionist scholarship alongside examples of Gilded Age evolutionary language, this paper shows how Social Darwinist reasoning naturalized inequalities, moralize competition, and limited arguments for collective responsibilities. Its contribution is to shift attention from what Social Darwinism justified to how scientific discourse made those justifications persuasive.

Keywords: Social Darwinism; Evolutionary discourse; Scientific authority; Gilded Age America; Historical review
Published: September 22, 2026
DOI: 10.54254/2753-7064/2026.37260
Volume: CHR Vol.121
pp. 132-141
Download PDF

References

  1. Hofstadter, R. (1992).Social Darwinism in American thought. Boston, Beacon Press.
  2. Paul, D. B. (2003). 9 Darwin, social Darwinism and eugenics.PhilPapers. philpapers.org/rec/PAUDS
  3. Leonard, T. C. (2009). Origins of the myth of social Darwinism: The ambiguous legacy of Richard Hofstadter's social Darwinism in American thought.Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 71(1), 37–51. www.princeton.edu/~tleonard/papers/myth.pdf, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2007.11.004
  4. Costaguta, L. (2019). Scientific racialism and labor internationalism in Gilded Age American socialism.The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era, 18(2), 199–220. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26854985, 10.2307/26854985
  5. Richards, R. J. (2013). The relation of Spencer's evolutionary theory to Darwin's.Was Hitler a Darwinian?, 116–134. 10.7208/chicago/9780226059099.003.0005
  6. Bannister, R. C. (2006, October 20). Bannister, socal darwnism: American perennial.Swarthmore.Edu. https://archive.swarthmore.edu/www1/SocSci/rbannis1/SD.htm
  7. Wyllie, I. G. (1959). Social Darwinism and the businessman.Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 103(5), 629–635. https://www.jstor.org/stable/985421
  8. Dike, J. H. (2024). A history of the concept of scientific literacy based in the intellectual discourse of the Gilded Age.UGA Open Scholar. https://openscholar.uga.edu/record/12933
  9. Yeo, R. (1984). Science and intellectual authority in mid-nineteenth-century Britain: Robert Chambers and "Vestiges of the natural history of creation."Victorian Studies, 28(1), 5–31. https://doi.org/10.2307/3826757
  10. Pence, C. H. Darwin, Charles | Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. iep.utm.edu/darwin/#H6
  11. Bowler, P. J. (2009).Evolution: The history of an idea(25th anniversary edition, with a new preface). University of California Press. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.8501312
  12. Olson, R. (2008).Science and scientism in nineteenth-century Europe. University of Illinois Press.
  13. Spencer, H. (2024, October 8).The principles of biology (Volume 1).
  14. Spencer, H. (2017, June 4).The principles of sociology, Vol. 1 (Classic Reprint). Forgotten Books.
  15. Sweet, W. (n.d.). Spencer, Herbert | Internet encyclopedia of philosophy.Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. iep.utm.edu/spencer/#H5
  16. Hähnel, M. (2021, April 7).Aristotelian naturalism(p. 97). Springer.
  17. Rowlingson, K., & Connor, S. (2010, August 25). The "deserving" rich? Inequality, morality and social policy.Journal of Social Policy, 40(3), 437–452. pure-oai. bham. ac. uk/ws/files/17369682/RowlingsonConnorS0047279410000668a.pdf, https://doi.org/10.1017/s0047279410000668
  18. Sumner, W. G. (2007, September 1).What social classes owe to each other. Cosimo, Inc.
  19. Carnegie, A. (2007, April 1).The gospel of wealth.
  20. Beck, N. (2012).Social Darwinism. https://www.sciencetheearth.com/uploads/2/4/6/5/24658156/beck_social_darwinism.pdf
  21. Spencer, H. (1995).Social statics. North Atlantic Books.