Industrial Revolution: How Did the Industrial Revolution Give Rise to New Philosophies?
Essay Preview: Industrial Revolution: How Did the Industrial Revolution Give Rise to New Philosophies?
Report this essay
4. How did the Industrial Revolution give rise to new philosophies?
The Industrial Revolution began in Great Britain because social, political, and agricultural conditions there were particularly favorable at that time. More importantly a stable govt. in Britain meant that monarchs and aristocrats were less likely by chance to seize income or impose taxes on people. As a result, earnings were safer, and ambitious businessmen could gain wealth, social status, and power more easily than in other parts of Europe. As a result this, many thinkers tried to understand this staggering changed that took place.
In addition, Britains government pursued a relatively “hands-off” economic policy. This free-market approach was made popular through British philosopher and economist Adam Smith and his book The Wealth of Nations (1776). The “hands-off” or laissez-faire policy permitted new methods and ideas to flourish, which meant that the government could not interfere in relations between workers and business owners. In his book, Smith argued that private competition free of regulation produces and distributes wealth better than the government regulated markets. His arguments were to justify capitalism and discourage government involvement in trade and exchange. Smith believed that entrepreneurs seeking their own businesses organize the economy most efficiently.
Smiths ideas were supported by economists Thomas Malthus and David Ricardo. Their ideas would be the foundation of capitalism (1). Like smith, Thomas Malthus writings on population shaped economic thinking for generations to come. He predicted that population would outpace food supply and suggested that getting involved in wars would help to keep check on population. Hes ridiculous! People actually though he was smartÐnow that means they were brainless like him too. However, he claimed that as long as population increases the poor would suffer, so he urged families to have fewer children. David Ricardo agreed with Malthus that the working class had too many children and not only that he was anti-government and believed that the economy will master itself (how can the economy master itself without supervision). There seem to be a connection hereÐ…these economists who believed in each other had great ideas and believes but individually their ideas were ludicrous. But they got wiserÐ…in his “iron law if wages”, Ricardo noted that when wages were high many families had more children as a result the many children increase the supply of labor but led a down fall in wages and higher unemployment. Ricardo had no hopes for the working class to escape poverty. His prediction would be called “dismal science” because of the gloomy economy.
The doctrine of laissez-faire in the hands of Jeremy Bentham became a philosophy of individualism and of utilitarian beliefs. The belief was that the government actions were useful only if they promote the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. John Stuart Mill, the follower of Benthams, in the 1800s led the utilitarian movement; he argued that actions are right if they promote happiness and wrong is they cause pain. He reexamined the idea that unrestricted competition in the free marker was always good and said that it favored the strong over the weak. Mill wanted a government that would step in and help to improve the hard lives in the working class. He