Literary Analysis Essay on Godwin vs Malthus: Criticism of Godwin's Writings

In the book Godwin vs Malthus, Malthus goes ahead to critic other publishers who in the past have written books that are in contrary to his. At the beginning of Chapter 10, Malthus does starts to critic the writings of Godwin.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

He writes that Godwin thought that all that is evil and bad were brought about by authorities and a group of people who have come together in pursuit for a common good and pondered on a human community whereby all these types of establishments are done away with. Marriage institution for instance was is one of the examples of the root cause of evil, religion is another. He painted a picture where such kind of a community would need to work more than thirty minutes each day per head. He anticipated that whatever is produced will be split up into every person's necessities and regarding this, the better percentage of the daytime work will be focused more on studying and meditation.

Malthus begins by putting in application his principles of population and subsistence to paint a picture on how this ideal situation, once established, would be abandoned. He cites in some few instances of double increase in population, any group of people that lives together, in a natural course, spring back to what it was in 1798. In essence, the England that was there at the time of Malthus's was the natural state of society - the state in the manner all human societies must move towards.

He cites that Godwin keeps away from any problem that relates to population growth by arguing that growth /expansion will reach to a point of a near standstill due to lessening what will be termed as "trade between the sexes". Malthus goes ahead in attacking that notion, Chapter eleven and does so in a way that depicts Godwin to be living in an isolated world. Malthus gets ahead to explain 'the

Man of God" one-sided view and sets down some human affections around deep affection, sex, and the womanly charm that he shares with the reader.

Malthus does express this idea in the first paragraph that I have rephrased below:

"... No progress can be made towards the removal of the strong emotions that exists between the genders in the many years that this world has come into formation. Men in the reduction of life have in all times and periods talked against a passion of which they no longer feel but not with much success. Malthus writes that for those who try to distance themselves from their innate being have not yet experienced what love is in actual reality and sarcastically puts it that they will be given a platform as very unqualified judges when it comes to the strength of passion in contributing to the total in delightfulness impacts in life. He writes that the delights that result from true love will result in the consideration of a better and the highest virtue. He narrates that there is rarely a man who has at one point in life been involved in pure pleasures of love and no matter how learned that person may be, will always look back at that same period as a pleasant time in his lifetime, where he will always reflect with fond memories and wish to travel back in time to those periods to re-live once more. He puts it up that the supremacy of intellect to bodily delights are made up of more of them occupying bigger time and having a bigger range and less answerable to satisfaction, than in them being much more genuine and necessary"

Malthus, the 'Godly man', acts the complete person to Godwin's, the "non-believer "he goes to say this: "... a bodily delight which is not looked after with the likelihood of a rather not so happy consequences does not go against the rules of 'rights and wrongs", and if it is diligently followed with such level of sobriety for intellectual accomplishments, it must, without doubt, make an addition to whole of delights in life. Genuine affection, spiced up by close relationships looks like to be the right blend of physical and of intellect pleasures that are well fit to the human nature and very strong tool to use in making alert the comforts of the soul and result in the most elegant gratifications"

He continues to write that Mr Godwin's says that for one to prove the obvious secondary status of delightfulness of feeling, 'You remove the trade of the sexes and strip it all of it related situations and it would be in general be hated" (Bk. I, ch. 5; in the third edition, Vol. I, pp. 71-72). Malthus disagrees with him for he puts forward this sentiment as he reacts to this by writing that Godwin might, in the same manner, say to someone who looks at an attractive tree, go ahead and cut all the lovely growing and spreading branches including leaves, and what and he ponders what beauty is left in a bare pole? He points out that it is the tree that had the lovely branches and the leaves that brought about the beauty to warrant admiration and not when it was bare without them. One attribute of a thing may not be very clear and may bring about emotions which are not similar, from a whole of two things the most distant, as an attractive lady, and the geographical plan of the Madagascar country. According to Malthus it is the balance of a person, the liveliness of that person, the the well-formed 'frail ' temper ,the caring and doted feelings of a person, the intelligence of a woman is what brings out the passion s of love and not just by the mere fact that one is a woman.. Malthus says that men having been driven by the passions of love, into actions which he terms as very detrimental to the larger public of the community, but urges that it probably be because they will have found it less difficult in withstanding these temptations had it come in a package of resemblance of that of a woman lacking other attractions whatsoever but just sex. He argues that to remove bodily delights of all their accompaniments, for one to demonstrate on inferior it is, is like to strip a magnet of some of its vital necessities of attraction and turn back to say it is frail and ineffective.

He goes ahead to write that in the act of chasing each pleasure, whether, of physical (bodily) or intellect, the facility that allows us to figure out the after-effects is the right guide. It is likely in that aspect that a better reasoning capacity will always keep at a bay the wrong use of sensual delights but that does not necessarily mean that it will diminish it completely.

In conclusion to this chapter Malthus points out that:

" It is a fact and history also makes it obvious that some of the beings of the biggest intellectual abilities have found it habitual not just a modest, but even in non-modest satisfaction in the delights of the physical love. He writes that in agreeing as he should only, and not giving considerations to several occasions to the opposite, that great mental efforts in some way tries to reduce the domain of passion over human but puts it in the same breath that it should be made better and better to surpass the most sparkling of the jewellery of the kind that exists now prior to any difference taking place which is of adequate to have any impact on population.

Malthus does not end there, he further writes to put this in points:

"... That he will by no manner assume that the large number of human beings has gotten to a point where they have attained its means of improvement, but says that his main sentiments in the essay tries to put in place a major point the very not probable that the most humble background people in any nation should always be adequately at liberty from needs and toil to attain any level of mental authority improvement".

We come to find in the section/chapter 13; Malthus focus is on Godwin's perspective indefinite prolongation of human life-Life without death. Malthus asserts that as much as Mr Godwin was an intelligent person, he did not agree with his way of reasoning here, he deemed it to be so foolish, that according to him it does not stand to warrant any debate. He just echoed his surprise on this.

He writes that Mr Godwin's notion giving respect to the latter times perspective of the human being towards immoral behaviour does look to be strangely put in a chapter that proclaims to do away with the protest to his technique of justness from the principle of population"

Malthus writes that he believes that Godwin thought that the "trade between the genders" would reduce to a level of disappearing completely.

Still in this chapter, Malthus's replies to Godwin's general truth that the human being was entirely a reasonable being. Malthus prefers to take man as "composite beings", a blend of both the logical with the instinctive. Godwin did not mince his words on this as he put it down:

"... In uncompromising though it won't acknowledge debate; the human being is a reasonable person ..."

We see that at this point of the debate, how Malthus criticizes Godwin is similar to the present-day debate over the great impact on the minds of the human being-nature or nature. Godwin's perspective is all on nature whilst Malthus's maintains for a blend.

He writes that he is willing to permit that every discretionary action comes before a decision of the brain, but goes ahead to say it is oddly a direct contrary to what he should think to just be theoretical on the topic and a rebuttal to all involved to put it that the fleshly tendencies of the human nature do not behave with such strength as much as to cause interruption, in these resolves"

This is about what Godwin suggested in that commerce between sexes will reduce considerably in a planet whereby rationality was given prevalence. When you read further the rest of chapter 13 Malthus's replies to the insistence by Godwin that prison adds no good and should, therefore, be gotten rid of.

In winding up on this section of chapter 13, Malthus's observation is that whatever the magnitude that reasonableness has a great impact on how a man behaves there is no expectation that one person will emerge victorious over another on just the grounds of good sense.

When you read the first essay of chapter 14, you will find out that Malthus is making intelligent points about these tenets of Godwin's: He writes that good sense and honesty when it is sufficiently is passed from one person to another will always triumph over mistakes and continuous to say that good sense and honesty is in a position where it can be sufficiently be passed well from one person to another :Truth is everywhere, the evils of and moral decays of the human being are not unconquerable, the human being is perfect, in essence, is vulnerable of never-ending upgrade "

Malthus begins by wondering what may "adequately communicated" actually mean. And wonders that if it means communication that is void of error, then Godwin's first hypothesis is only correct by way of trying to prove what he already ends within the long run, but not, in essence, a great philosophical statement.

Later in the chapter, Malthus does state the likelihood of a perfection/completeness that differs far from that of Godwin. Mathematically, Malthus did view Goldwin's vision of perfectibility as an unbounded set that can be continuously improved while Malthus himself viewed it as a restricted set of human advancements that do not have a point of limitation. For an average individual it will make sense to put it that Godwin thought of perfectibility as not to be limited in scope but on the other hand, Malthus did see the perfection of human nature as not infinite and inborn, and that humanity will almost attain this kind of perfection but not to the level of achieving it-the approach might be made nearer without going above some fixed, limited possibility.

The following observations are ma...