Better-World Philosophy

Last updated

Better-World Philosophy
Better-World Philosophy A Sociological Synthesis.djvu
First edition cover
Author J. Howard Moore
LanguageEnglish
Subject
Genre
  • Philosophy
  • sociology
PublisherThe Ward Waugh Company
Publication date
1899
Publication placeUnited States
Media typePrint (hardcover)
Pages275
OCLC 5340920
Text Better-World Philosophy at the Internet Archive

Better-World Philosophy: A Sociological Synthesis is an 1899 philosophical and sociological treatise by American zoologist and philosopher J. Howard Moore. Drawing on ethics, sociology, and evolutionary theory, the book presents Moore's theory of moral and social progress as grounded in the unity of life and the extension of ethical concern to all sentient beings. It explores how desire, labor, heredity, and cooperation shape moral development and social organization, and argues that education and social reform can advance human and animal welfare.

Contents

Upon its release, Better-World Philosophy received a mixed critical response. Some reviewers, including The Literary World , described Moore's outlook as pessimistic, while others, such as the Journal of Education and the Advocate of Peace , praised its clarity and ethical seriousness. The book was endorsed by figures including Henry Demarest Lloyd, Robert G. Ingersoll, George D. Herron, and John Peter Altgeld, and attracted the attention of English humanitarian Henry S. Salt, who began corresponding with Moore.

According to historian Donna L. Davey, Better-World Philosophy was Moore's first major work and reflected both his moral idealism and his belief in moral education and eugenics as instruments of social improvement. The book was first published in Chicago by the Ward Waugh Publishing Company in 1899, reissued by Charles H. Kerr & Company in 1906, and published in London by Ernest Bell in 1907.

Background

J. Howard Moore in 1895 Drawing of J. Howard Moore - Waterbury Evening Democrat (July 22, 1895).png
J. Howard Moore in 1895

J. Howard Moore (1862–1916) was an American zoologist and philosopher. He was an early advocate of animal rights and ethical vegetarianism. Moore's scientific background and moral philosophy deeply influenced his writings. He was also associated with the broader humanitarian movement of the late 19th and early 20th centuries, which sought to improve the treatment of both humans and animals. [1]

Better-World Philosophy was part of a larger body of work by Moore including titles such as, Why I Am a Vegetarian (1895), The Universal Kinship (1906) and The New Ethics (1907). These works collectively advanced his belief in the interconnectedness of all life and the need for a moral evolution that would lead to a more compassionate world. [1]

Summary

Advertisement for Better-World Philosophy in 1899 Better-World Philosophy by J. Howard Moore.jpg
Advertisement for Better-World Philosophy in 1899

Better-World Philosophy is organized into nine sections, each outlining an aspect of Moore's sociological and ethical system. The chapters progress from human labor and understanding of nature to moral and social evolution, culminating in collective and individual ethical cultivation. [2] In a brief prefatory note, he writes that the book "does not claim to be infallible—simply serious." [3] :Prefatory note

The problem of industry

Moore begins by describing humanity as part of the animal world and driven by desire. To satisfy these desires, people must manage and foresee the inanimate universe. Industry, he writes, is the organized management of nature for human purposes. Labor defines humanity's relation to the universe, and people seek to escape it through shirking, machinery, and cooperation. [3] :11–48

Blunders

This chapter identifies two major "blunders" made by humankind: misunderstanding the universe as lawless, and conceiving the inanimate world as conscious or voluntary. These errors, according to Moore, distort the human approach to knowledge and progress. [3] :49–73

The social problem

Moore defines the social problem as the relation of each individual to the rest of the universe. It arises from the plurality and sociability of life. Even when socialized, this relation remains the same in principle, but is complicated by conscious interdependence among individuals. Social desires, evolved through associated life, are satisfied by cooperation rather than domination. Moore rejects the supposed infallibility of nature arguing that morality must be created consciously. [3] :73–91

Egoism and altruism

In the nature of living beings, Moore identifies two elements: the impulse to act for oneself and the impulse to act for others. He discusses the origin of these tendencies, arguing that egoism developed through the struggle of individuals to survive, while altruism arose chiefly from struggles between groups. This balance between self-interest and sympathy forms the moral basis of social evolution. [3] :92–121

The preponderance of egoism

Moore surveys the dominance of egoism in human and animal life. He describes human egoism as especially insolent and extravagant in its treatment of other species and of fellow humans. The persistence of selfish behavior, he suggests, is the chief obstacle to moral and social progress. [3] :122–138

The social ideal

The social ideal concerns the "ideal relation" among all beings in the universe — the relation that best promotes the satisfaction of universal desire. Moore holds that this relation mirrors what any individual would wish for themselves: a harmony of interests across the animate universe. He argues that this principle is affirmed by the teachings of human sages and by historical, biological, and cosmic tendencies. [3] :139–168

The derivation of the natures of living beings

Moore defines the nature of any being as the character of its conscious tendencies to act. The nature of organisms results from the interaction of heredity and environment. He describes environment as a trinity of inanimate, animate, and internal factors, each contributing to evolution. [3] :169–201

Race culture

This chapter addresses heredity and moral progress through education and environmental influence. Moore argues that humanity can regenerate itself through conscious modification of the "generative stream", improving conditions by environmental and social selection rather than by chance. He discusses the role of punishment, the neutralization of harmful selection, and the displacement of harsh natural discrimination by deliberate self-culture. [3] :202–242

Individual culture

The final chapter turns to personal ethics. Moore maintains that true culture is not merely intellectual but moral. The inculcation of altruism, he writes, is as important as the accumulation of knowledge. Because people are naturally egoistic, conscious culture must work to eliminate selfishness with the same effort once devoted to developing intellect. He concludes with the call to reform human nature through moral self-discipline and "neural" (mental) transformation. [3] :243–275

Reception

Review of Better-World Philosophy in The Advocate of Peace, 1900 Better-World Philosophy review.png
Review of Better-World Philosophy in The Advocate of Peace , 1900

Contemporary

In the Oakland Enquirer, A. A. Denison referred to Better-World Philosophy as a "suggestive and valuable" contribution to progressive thought. He described Moore's style as clear and logical and noted his use of evolutionary ideas in discussions of ethics and social reform. Denison regarded the book as an intelligent and useful guide for readers interested in social improvement and the development of moral and economic thought. [4]

A review in The Literary World described Moore as an "incurable pessimist", arguing that his outlook focused too heavily on the darker aspects of human nature and cruelty. The reviewer acknowledged Moore's moral earnestness but criticised his tone as overly severe and despairing, questioning whether a philosophy so pessimistic could inspire social improvement. Despite this, the review recognised the book's call for altruistic education and reform as sincere, though doubted its practical impact. [5]

In the Journal of Education , the book was described as clear, original, and likely to exert considerable influence, with the reviewer noting its readability and the author's enthusiasm. [6] The Advocate of Peace characterised it as a thoughtful examination of the relationship between social inheritance and environment, emphasising its advocacy of cooperation and moral development as means of social improvement. [7]

The School Journal reported that Lester Frank Ward found the book notable for its depth and originality of thought, while David Starr Jordan described it as lively in style and bold in conclusion, recommending it to readers interested in social advancement. [8] The People's Press endorsed the book and printed statements of support from Henry Demarest Lloyd, Robert G. Ingersoll, George D. Herron, and John Peter Altgeld. [9]

After reviewing the book, Henry S. Salt, the English humanitarian and author of Animals' Rights: Considered in Relation to Social Progress (1892), began a correspondence with Moore that developed into a lasting friendship. [1]

Modern

In her biographical entry on Moore for the Dictionary of Literary Biography , historian Donna L. Davey described Better-World Philosophy as Moore's first major work, observing that contemporary reviews, though mixed, often remarked on his bold style and intensity of opinion. She noted that while some critics viewed his outlook as pessimistic, it instead reflected his moral seriousness and desire to reform human attitudes toward life and ethics. Davey wrote that the book expressed Moore's belief in the unity of all life and the extension of moral concern to animals capable of feeling, outlining his vision of an altruistic society shaped by evolutionary principles. She also observed that Moore argued in favour of eugenics, cautioned against reckless reproduction, and maintained that the cultivation of altruism should begin in childhood through moral education fostering sympathy for all beings. [1]

Publication history

Better-World Philosophy was first published in Chicago by the Ward Waugh Company in 1899. [1] A second edition was issued by Charles H. Kerr & Company in 1906, as part of its International Library of Social Science series. [10] This was followed by a London edition published by Ernest Bell in 1907. [11]

References

  1. 1 2 3 4 5 Davey, Donna L. (2009). "J. Howard Moore". In Furey, Hester Lee (ed.). Dictionary of Literary Biography . American Radical and Reform Writers: Second Series. Vol. 345. Farmington Hills, Michigan: Gale. ISBN   978-0-7876-8163-0. OCLC   241304990 via Internet Archive.
  2. T. (June 1899). "Better-World Philosophy". The Conservator. 10 (4). Philadelphia: 75–76 via Google Books.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Moore, J. Howard (1899). Better-World Philosophy: A Sociological Synthesis. Chicago: The Ward Waugh Publishing Company.
  4. Denison, A. A. (July 1, 1907). "A Better World Philosophy" . Oakland Enquirer. p. 6. Retrieved October 21, 2025 via Newspapers.com.
  5. "Better-World Philosophy". The Literary World . 30 (15). Boston: 234. July 22, 1899 via Google Books.
  6. "Book Review: Better-World Philosophy" . Journal of Education . 50 (9): 162. September 1899. doi:10.1177/002205749905000919. ISSN   0022-0574.
  7. "Review of Better-World Philosophy". The Advocate of Peace . 62 (1): 21. January 1900. ISSN   2155-7799. JSTOR   25751498.
  8. "Notes of New Books". The School Journal. Vol. 60. Chicago: E. L. Kellogg & Co. 1900. p.  32.
  9. "Better World Philosophy" . The People's Press. February 14, 1901. p. 8. Retrieved October 21, 2025 via Newspapers.com.
  10. Better-World Philosophy: A Sociological Synthesis. Chicago: Charles H. Kerr & Company. 1906. OCLC   5534683.
  11. Better-World Philosophy: A Sociological Synthesis. London: Ernest Bell. 1907. OCLC   502633530.