33 



of Darwin's own terminology; but, on the other hand, that 

 it is not at all necessary that the distinctions which he makes, 

 and which in some cases cause him difficulty, should be held 

 by us as valid distinctions. 



Darwin claims to approach the moral question from the 

 standpoint of natural history, by which manifestly is meant 

 the standpoint of biological history governed according to 

 the principle of Natural Selection. It is in accordance with 

 this standpoint that Darwin makes the claim that our morality 

 would have been quite different had men been reared under 

 precisely the same conditions as hive-bees, that is, that under 

 such conditions "there can hardly be a doubt" but that a 

 system of wholesale murder would be considered morally right 

 in connection with the solution of the population question. 

 Darwin's statement in this connection has proved distinctly 

 objectionable to many ethical writers. For example, in a foot- 

 note, Darwin quotes Mr. H. Sidgwick in reply to his (that is, 

 Darwin's) position on this matter: "Mr. Sidgwick remarks in 

 an able discussion on this subject (The Academy, June 15, 

 1872, p. 231), 'a superior bee, we may feel sure, would aspire 

 to a milder solution of the population question'." "Judging, 

 however," Darwin replies, "from the habits of many or most 

 savages, man solves the problem by female infanticide, 

 polyandry and promiscuous intercourse; therefore, it may well 

 be doubted whether it would be a milder method." 1 



It appears evident, from Darwin's contention in this 

 matter, that his tendency is to lose sight of the "intellectual 

 faculties * * * as active and as highly developed as in man", 

 and to place the emphasis upon the side of Natural Selection, 

 that is, biological selection. Sidgwick, less dominated by the 

 idea of Natural Selection, maintains, as observed, a somewhat 

 different view of the situation. Darwin 's tendency is to bring 

 man down to the level of the bee, while that of Sidgwick is to 

 bring the bee up to the level of man, or at least to show that 

 Darwin's "levelling down " process cannot be achieved. This 

 is evident from the fact that Darwin, in using the term 'man' 

 goes to the savage for his illustration, while Sidgwick speaks 

 only of "a superior bee". In discussing such a subject as the 

 moral in relation to man whose intellectual faculties are 

 active and highly developed Darwin is not justified in using 

 as his type of man the savage, who can claim but a minimum 

 of such active and highly developed intellectual faculties, but 

 who is rather to a great extent still under the control of Natural 



'O.C. p. 73, footnote. 



