Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T09:26:06.844Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

HEREDITARIANISM, EUGENICS, AND AMERICAN SOCIAL SCIENCE IN THE INTERWAR YEARS: MEET THE CARVERIANS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 February 2022

Luca Fiorito  and
Valentina Erasmo
Luca Fiorito*
Affiliation:
Luca Fiorito: University of Palermo
Valentina Erasmo
Affiliation:
Valentina Erasmo: G. D’Annunzio University.
*
Correspondence may be addressed to Luca Fiorito at [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Like other Progressive Era reformers, Thomas Nixon Carver promoted a form of biology-infused social science that included both eugenics and a strong version of hereditarianism. Carver was also a charismatic teacher who trained several generations of economists and sociologists at Harvard. In this paper we will focus on the contribution of three of them: James A. Field, Norman E. Himes, and Carl S. Joslyn. These authors differ in terms of style, method, and emphasis—with Field and Himes more interested in population and birth control issues, and Joslyn in the dynamics of social stratification. As it will be shown below, however, all of them reveal an explicit commitment to hereditarianism and eugenics, which can be directly traced back to Carver’s influence during their student days at Harvard.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of the History of Economic Thought , Volume 44 , Issue 1 , March 2022 , pp. 24 - 50
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the History of Economics Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

We wish to thank Tim Leonard, David Levy, Sandra Peart, Malcolm Rutherford, and two unknown referees for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this paper. The usual disclaimers apply.

References

REFERENCES

Allen, Garland E. 2011. “Eugenics and Modern Biology: Critiques of Eugenics, 1910–1945.” Annals of Human Genetics 75 (3): 314–325.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Asso, Pier Francesco, and Fiorito, Luca. 2004. “Human Nature and Economic Institutions: Instinct Psychology, Behaviorism, and the Evolution of American Institutionalism.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 26 (4): 445–477.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bristol, Lucius M. 1915. Social Adaptation: A Study in the Development of the Doctrine of Adaptation as a Theory of Social Progress. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Burlingame, Leonas L. 1940. Heredity and Social Problems. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Bushee, Frederick A. 1903. “Ethnic Factors in the Population of Boston.” Publications of the American Economic Association, 3rd Series, 4 (2): 1–171.Google Scholar
Bushee, Frederick A. 1923. Principles of Sociology. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Carpenter, Niles. 1927. Immigrants and Their Children. A Study Based on Census Statistics Relative to the Foreign Born and the Native White of Foreign or Mixed Parentage. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
Carpenter, Niles. 1935. “The Social Survey of Merseyside.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 49 (4): 680–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carver, Thomas Nixon. 1894. “The Theory of Wages Adjusted to Recent Theories of Value.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 8 (4): 377–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carver, Thomas Nixon. 1904. The Distribution of Wealth. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Carver, Thomas Nixon. 1912a. “Economic Significance of Changes in Country Population.” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 40: 21–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carver, Thomas Nixon. 1912b. The Religion Worth Having. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
Carver, Thomas Nixon. 1915. Essays in Social Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carver, Thomas Nixon. 1919. Principles of Political Economy. Boston: Ginn and Company.Google Scholar
Carver, Thomas Nixon. 1929. “The Economic Test of Fitness.” Eugenics: A Journal of Race Betterment 2 (7): 3–7.Google Scholar
Carver, Thomas Nixon. 1930. “Occupational Congestion.” Birth Control Review 14 (7): 198–199.Google Scholar
Carver, Thomas Nixon. 1935a. The Essential Factors of Social Evolution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carver, Thomas Nixon. 1935b. What Must We Do to Save Our Economic System? Los Angeles: Self-published.Google Scholar
Carver, Thomas Nixon. 1949. Recollections of an Unplanned Life. Los Angeles: The Ward Ritchie Press.Google Scholar
Crook, Wilford H. 1935. “Cultural Compulsives: The Survival of Dogma in the Sciences.” In Himes, Norman E., ed., Economics, Sociology, and the Modern World. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 292–302.Google Scholar
Eggen, J. B. 1926. “The Fallacy of Eugenics.” Social Forces 5 (1): 104–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, James A. 1911a. “The Progress of Eugenics.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 26 (1): 1–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, James A. 1911b. “The Early Propagandist Movement in English Population Theory.” American Economic Review 1 (2): 207–236.Google Scholar
Field, James A. 1931. Essays on Population and Other Papers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fiorito, Luca. 2013. “Between Progressivism and Institutionalism: Albert Benedict Wolfe on Eugenics.” Journal of the History of Economic Thought 35 (4): 449–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorito, Luca. 2019. “Social Stratification, Hereditarianism, and Eugenics: A Harvard Tale.” Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology 37C: 99–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorito, Luca, and Nerozzi, Sebastiano. 2018. “Chicago Economics in the Making, 1926–1940: A Further Look at United States Interwar Pluralism.” In Leeson, Robert, ed., Hayek: A Collaborative Biography, Part XV: The Chicago School of Economics, Hayek’s “Luck” and the 1974 Nobel Prize for Economic Science. London: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 373–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fiorito, Luca, and Orsi, Cosma. 2017. “’Survival Value and a Robust, Practical, Joyless Individualism’: Thomas Nixon Carver, Social Justice, and Eugenics.” History of Political Economy 49 (3): 469–495.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flam, Harry. 1993. “Bertil Ohlin’s Contribution to International Economics.” In Jonung, Lars, ed., Swedish Economic Thought: Explorations and Advances. New York: Routledge, pp. 143–155.Google Scholar
Galbraith, John K. 1987. Economics in Perspective: A Critical History. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Galton, Francis. 1869. Hereditary Genius: An Inquiry into its Laws and Consequences. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Craufurd D. W. 2014. Walter Lippmann: Public Economist. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himes, Norman E. 1928a. “The Place of John Stuart Mill and of Robert Owen in the History of English Neo-Malthusianism.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 42 (4): 627–640.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himes, Norman E. 1928b. “British Birth Control Clinics: Some Results and Eugenic Aspects of their Work.” Eugenics Review 20 (3): 157–165.Google Scholar
Himes, Norman E. 1929. “John Stuart Mill’s Attitude towards neo-Malthusianism.” In Economic History, supplement to Economic Journal 1: 457–484.Google Scholar
Himes, Norman E. 1931. “Review of Essays on Population and Other Papers by James Alfred Field.” Eugenics Review 23 (3): 258–262.Google Scholar
Himes, Norman E. 1932. “Review of Essays on Population and Other Papers by James Alfred Field.” Journal of Political Economy 40 (1): 118–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Himes, Norman E. 1934. “Review of American Business Leaders: A Study in Social Origins and Social Stratification by Frank W. Taussig and Carl S. Joslyn.” Eugenics Review 26 (1): 64–65.Google Scholar
Himes, Norman E. 1936a. Medical History of Contraception. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins.Google Scholar
Himes, Norman E. 1936b. “Letter to the Editor.” Eugenics Review 28 (1): 82–83.Google Scholar
Himes, Norman E. 1940. “Human Genetics and Sociology.” Journal of Heredity 31 (3): 153–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofstadter, Richard. 1945. Social Darwinism in American Thought, 1860–1915. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Joslyn, Carl S. 1921. “What Can a man Afford?” American Economic Review 1 (4): 99–118.Google Scholar
Joslyn, Carl S. 1927. “Sorokin on Social Mobility.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 42 (1): 130–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joslyn, Carl S. 1930. “The Social Origins of American Business Leaders.” PhD dissertation, Harvard University.Google Scholar
Journal of Heredity. 1917. “Economics and Eugenics: Review of a Book by Thomas Nixon Carver.” Journal of Heredity 8 (3): 120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kallen, Horace M. 1930. “Behaviorism.” In Edwin, R. A. Seligman and Johnson, Alvin S., eds., Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences. Volume 2. New York: Macmillan, pp. 495–498.Google Scholar
Knight, Frank H. 1925. “Review of The Economy of Human Energy by Thomas Nixon Carver.” Journal of Social Forces 3 (4): 777–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, Frank H. 1938. “Lippmann’s The Good Society .” Journal of Political Economy 46 (6): 864–872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, Thomas C. 2005. “Mistaking Eugenics for Social Darwinism: Why Eugenics Is Missing from the History of American Economics.” History of Political Economy 37 (1): 200–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonard, Thomas C. 2016. Illiberal Reformers: Race, Eugenics, and American Economics in the Progressive Era. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levy, David M., and Peart, Sandra. 2015. “Sympathy Caught Between Darwin and Eugenics.” In Schliesser, Eric, ed., Sympathy: A History. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 323–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lippmann, Walter. 1922a. “The Abuse of the Tests.” New Republic 32 (415): 297–298.Google Scholar
Lippmann, Walter. 1922b. “The Mystery of the ‘A’ Men.” New Republic 32 (413): 246–248.Google Scholar
Lippmann, Walter. 1937. The Good Society. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.Google Scholar
Marshall, Leon C., Wright, Chester W., and Field, James A.. 1910. Outlines of Economics Developed in a Series of Problems. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
McDougall, William. 1921. Is America Safe for Democracy? New York: Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
Nichols, Lawrence T. 1992. “The Establishment of Sociology at Harvard. A Case of Organizational Ambivalence and Scientific Vulnerability.” In Elliott, Clark A. and Rossiter, Margareth W., eds., Science at Harvard University: Historical Perspectives. Bethlehem, PA: Leigh University Press, pp. 191–222.Google Scholar
Popenoe, Paul, and Johnson, Roswell H.. 1918. Applied Eugenics. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Richards, Martin. 2008. “Artificial Insemination and Eugenics: Celibate Motherhood, Eutelegenesis and Germinal Choice.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Medical Sciences 39 (2): 211–221.Google ScholarPubMed
Ripley, William Z. 1899. The Races of Europe: A Sociological Study. New York: D. Appleton and Co.Google Scholar
Rosen, Christine. 2004. Preaching Eugenics: Religious Leaders and the American Eugenics Movement. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, Dorothy. 1991. The Origins of American Social Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Samuelson, Paul A. 1981. “Bertil Ohlin (1899–1979).” Scandinavian Journal of Economics 83 (3): 355–371.Google Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1954. History of Economic Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Snavely, Tipton R. 1933. “The Caste of Business.” Virginia Quarterly Review 9 (1): 286–288.Google Scholar
Sorokin, Pitirim A. 1927. Social Mobility. New York: Harper & Brothers.Google Scholar
Sorokin, Pitirim A., and Zimmerman, Carle C.. 1928. “Farmer Leaders in the United States.” Social Forces 7 (1): 33–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stack, David. 2018. “‘Beyond the Facts’: How a U.S. Sociologist Made John Stuart Mill into a ‘Neo-Malthusian.’” Historical Research 91 (254): 772–790.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suranyi-Unger, Theo. 1931. Economics in the Twentieth Century: The History of its International Development. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Taussig, Frank W., and Joslyn, Carl S.. 1932. American Business Leaders: A Study in Social Origins and Social Stratification. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Wolfe, Albert B. 1912. “Review of The Religion Worth Having by Thomas Nixon Carver.” American Economic Review 2 (3): 679–681.Google Scholar
Wolfe, Albert B. 1917. “Some Phases of the Minimum Wage: Discussion.” American Economic Review 7 (1): 275–281.Google Scholar
Wolfe, Albert B. 1923. Conservatism, Radicalism, and Scientific Method: An Essay on Social Attitudes. New York: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, Albert B. 1928. “The Population Problem Since the World War: A Survey of Literature and Research.” Journal of Political Economy 36 (5): 529–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolfe, Albert B. 1929. “The Population Problem Since the World War: A Survey of Literature and Research (Concluded).” Journal of Political Economy 37 (1): 87–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar