Herbert Spencer
Herbert Spencer:Recovery of a Lost Resource
By Michael E. Marotta
SOCL 640: Advanced Social Theory
Dr. Robert Orrange
Winter 2009
March 2, 2009
"My goal is only to right what I believe has been a great wrong in
sociology and give Spencer his due. And as with all historical figures, we
should extract what is useful in their work and then move on, relegating
scholars of the past to the footnotes of our own creative efforts. The pages
to follow can thus be seen as my attempt to give us a more appreciative
view of what we footnote when we cite Spencer." – Jonathan H. Turner
This paper is an advocate’s plea for justice. Herbert Spencer is not totally forgotten, but he is often excluded from the discursive space of sociology. We do not give his ideas voice despite his advocacy of women’s rights, the rights of children and labor unions. We ignore his opposition to colonialism and imperialism. We recite that we are opposed to his “social Darwinism” (even though he published before Darwin) and remain uninformed about his structural-functional model for social development. Sociologists do want society to “improve.” We just do not want it to “evolve.” We find him guilty by association: Andrew Carnegie called him “Dear Teacher;” Andrew Carnegie was a robber baron; therefore, we do not like Spencer. Yet, we do not let Stalin interfere with our appreciation of Marx.
This paper will identify some of Spencer’s many compelling ideas. It will focus on his sociology, of course. However, Spencer’s sociology rests on biology and leads to politics, and those must be addressed, as well. Spencer had his personal flaws, as who does not? This paper will nod to his personality only as it affected his ideas and their presentation. Throughout, in the citation of sources, easy evidence of his individualism will be a constant theme. This is the reason why sociologists do not like Spencer; and why he is mischaracterized, misquoted and misunderstood, all to our own loss.