: This paper questions the common view that Darwinian biology is a straighforwardextension of classical political economy. Our analysis contrasts the economists’ classification scheme – whereby all humans were presumed natural kids, to be equally competent for economic andpolitical decision making – with the classification scheme that developed, post-Darwin. When thetools of political economy were imported into biology, the presumption of homogeneity of competence was denied. Charles Kingsley played a significant role in the transition from one sort of classificatory scheme to another, in the overthrow of the economists’ notion that humans are thesame in their capacity for trade and moral judgment. Darwin sent Kingsley presentation copy of
Origin of Species
and quoted in the second edition as the ‘celebrated author and divine’ who hadsketched a theology in which Providence used natural selection in the creation process Theeconomists’ doctrine that all people form a natural kind had many opponents. Biologists agreed witheconomists that, whatever differences existed between races of people, none put a person outsidethe protection of law. Other opponents, e.g., Thomas Carlyle, criticized both the economists’premise
their conclusion regarding protection under the law. Kingsley moved from a Carlyleanto a Darwinian opposition to natural kinds.
classical political economy, Charles Darwin, Charles Kingsley, natural kinds, naturaltheology, classification, great man theory of history, little man theory of history.
A12, A13, B12, B25, B31