Affects of the Industrial Revolution on Human Nature
Anne Vasquez
Mater Academy
Hialeah Gardens
2008 NEH Seminar for School Teachers
Interpretations of the Industrial revolution in Britain
Human nature is defined in the Britannica Encyclopaedia as “Fundamental dispositions and traits of humans”. Throughout history debate over human nature has centered on whether humans are generally selfish and competitive or more benevolent and social. The Industrial Revolution in Britain is one context where human nature can be examined from a variety of points of view. There are questions to consider in examining the affects of industrialization on human nature during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. First, did the addition of new technologies and economic changes cause essential change in the “fundamental human traits”? Second, how much of the change was self-driven instead of being forced by other people’s actions?
Lastly, did changes in laws reflect a change in human nature?
It is impossible to pinpoint exactly which invention created the first major impact on production or the social psyche in Great Britain, but certainly Richard
Arkwright’s water frame is one of importance. As soon as he and his partners figured out the technology, they needed to find the workers to build his water-powered mill and then to keep it running. In what was once a rural countryside, he first built a mill and as the labour was supplied, he continued to build the entire village of Cromford to meet the needs of his workers. People travelled from miles around to take jobs in the mill and thus created a new social setting for themselves. As time went on, Arkwright built new mills and others and the pattern repeated itself where country farmers found themselves working and living in a new environment. This change in the social

2 environment inevitably caused change in human interaction and what is fundamentally thought of as human nature. Men like Arkwright were now paying their workers and although they had some sense of responsibility for them, they were not their guardians as had been during feudal times. The payment of wages somehow absolved them of further responsibility and people were forced to take care of all their own basic needs with the wages they were earning. Capitalism that was driven by the new technologies led to a society that was far more based on the concept of laissezfaire and the idea that each man should care for himself and his own family. In other words, the new technology and economy were setting the stage for the competitive and selfish traits of human nature to prevail.
Approximately seventy years after Arkwright’s first mill, society was questioning the benefits of the modern economy. One critic was Thomas Carlyle, who in 1843 argued that modern social problems were caused by economic issues. In his work, Past and Present , he stated, “The saddest news is, that we should find our
National Existence, as I sometimes heard it said, depend on selling manufactured cotton at a farthing an ell cheaper than other People.” This quote demonstrates
Carlyle’s concern that the social condition had changed since the advent of the
Industrial Revolution and the identity of Britain was now only based on economics.
He goes on to warn that the society will not be able to exist for long if they only worry about competition and outselling other countries. Carlyle was witnessing a change in human nature from where work was about survival and taking care of each other to a more capital driven society. Money seems to be the driving force behind everything, and that included the social issues of the day.
In 1815, Robert Owen made similar observations to Carlyle in Observations on the Effect of the Manufacturing System.
Owen claimed that, “The manufacturing

3 system has already so far extended its influence over the British Empire, as to effect an essential change in the general character of the mass of the people.” He goes on to explain that amassing wealth and having luxury goods is the new passion of many people in Britain. Unfortunately, this new economy has left the lower class people more miserable and worse off than before the manufacturing age. Owen eventually became a social reformer who saw this change in “general character” as something that needed to be addressed. He took an interest in improving the lot of the working classes. Many of his counterparts saw the capitalist system as being sufficient to help the lower classes while their own inclination was to live the lifestyle they felt they deserved. In other words, their human nature was more self-centered and selfish.
Previously, the upper classes relied more on their feudal workers and could not be so selfish as to ignore their needs or the system would crumble. For a long time, Poor
Laws also mandated that people in the local parish were supposed to take care of one another. Such laws did not disappear with the Industrial Revolution, but they were more limited as Parliament made changes based on the needs of the capitalist who paid for them.
The Town Labourer explains that, “The Industrial Revolution produced a new powerful rich class, the class of the capitalist manufacturer.” In other words, the creation of a completely new class of people will have an effect on society as a whole and this includes human nature. People who did not come from an aristocratic background found that with new technology and economic opportunity they could create wealth for themselves and live quite comfortably. Since many of these people came from a background of little means, it was easy for them to dismiss the poverty of others by saying that they should work a little harder to gain the same standing and improve themselves. Capitalism has always carried with it the idea that hard work and

4 determination can take anyone from the poorest of conditions and help them to live comfortably among the middle class. This view is closely tied to the selfish, competitive human nature that does not feel much responsibility towards helping fellow human beings.
The next question is whether changes to human nature were self-driven or influenced by outside factors. Authors of fiction during the time period also grappled with the idea of human nature and possible change. In his novel, Hard Times , Charles
Dickens used his characters to give a clear picture of the traits of the time. Several of the characters are examples of the type of change in society that seemed to come from their training and upbringing rather than an internal motivation. Gradgrind and
Bounderby are central figures in the new system of Coketown that is based only on
“facts” or in other words the tangible elements of all the changes taking place. Their admiration for the fact-based system leads them to support, without hesitation, the school system where teachers are supposed to “teach these boys and girls nothing but
Facts.” One such student was Bitzer, who through this fact-based training learns to deny his own human nature. In the beginning of the novel, Bitzer is called upon to define a horse, which he dutifully does by only stating the facts, “Quadruped,
Graminivorous…” As Bitzer grows up, his human nature is developed by this system, and he does not question his mechanical existence but instead seems to lose track of his humanity. By the end of the novel, Gradgrind attempts to appeal to Bitzer’s humanity by asking him if he has a heart. He responds by saying, “the circulation, sir, couldn’t be carried on without one.” It seems that Bitzer has lost touch with his humanness and the system he was educated in and forced to labour under was the cause of his human nature. This fictional character could serve as an example of how real life people were forced to lose touch with their own humanity by being forced

5 into this mechanized system. The apprentices that were housed at the Quarry Mill must have had some sense of this as they were indentured to work there and locked up against their will. By living their childhood in this system, they probably created some coping mechanisms that put them out of touch with their real feelings and human nature. Dickens also indirectly comments on the benevolent side of human nature with his depiction of the circus people. It seems that people who are left outside of the system seem to develop warm, helpful traits. Dickens best explained their character traits with this phrase, “an untiring readiness to help and pity one another.” The image of his group of circus performers is certainly more warm and light hearted than other people in the story who have been subjected to the factory system. One reason for this group to be described this way is that they have not experienced a change in human nature, and Dickens may have been saying that industrialization may be forcing fundamental change that leads humans to become more self- centered and lack compassion for one another as Bitzer personifies.
The last issue asks if the laws created during the Industrial Revolution were reflective of any changes in human nature. According to The Town Labourer ,
“inequality was deliberately set up when the courts became the recognized instrument of class supremacy.” As the population grew and social conditions changed during the nineteenth century, many people became uncomfortable with the actions of those around them. The moneyed classes decided that the best way to control the working classes was through the legal system. Throughout the century, new felonies were added to the lists of crimes and the penal system became harsher and less forgiving.
This is reflective of a move to a more selfish and competitive human nature. The middle class supported the expansion of the legal system as long as it provided them with protection for the goods they were accumulating and protected them from the

6 working classes. The system did little if anything to reform lawbreakers; instead they were frequently shipped off to Australia just to get rid of them. This lack of rehabilitation or changing the extreme poverty that caused many of the crimes also demonstrates this selfish nature.
During the 1800s many laws did not reflect this self-centered nature.
Parliament enacted several laws aimed at protecting workers and improving their conditions. For example the Factory Act of 1833 set up a system of enforcement of all parliamentary laws pertaining to working conditions by establishing factory inspectors. A few years later in 1847, the workday was shortened to ten hours for women and children. In the Mines Act of 1842 women and children were no longer allowed to enter mines to do the most dangerous jobs. Instead, they could only be employed in jobs near the entrance to the mine shafts (Morgan).
It seems that while the criminal laws were expanding to reflect a selfish human nature, the labour related laws were actually maintaining the notion of a collective society that is responsible for each other. Although laissez-faire policies often prevailed, generally new factory and labor laws reflected a greater sense in society that was humane.
Perhaps it is too simplistic to assume that all humans share many traits that could be labelled a human nature. However, capitalism in its earliest forms did little to encourage humane treatment of workers. The lead miners of Killhope were forced to purchase their own equipment and often did not make enough money to have much leftover after paying expenses. Meanwhile, the mine owners were continually building their wealth without regard for where it came from. Miners have always been at the bottom of economic scales, and it seems that if there was a collective and benevolent human nature at some point all of us would be compelled to improve

working conditions for them as well as other low paid labourers. Technology and economics have been key factors in the past three hundred years in the shaping of social interactions and public policy. Fortunately, the pressure on policy makers has only increased over time to improve the lives of ordinary citizens. Although the framework for the modern economy was set during the Industrial Revolution, the selfish human nature does not seem to prevail. The systems and interactions constantly evolve, so there may be hope for society yet.
References
Carlyle, Thomas, Past and Present, 1843.
Dickens, Charles, Hard Times, 1854.
Hammond, J.L. and Barbara, The Town Labourer, London: Longmans.1917.
Morgan, Kenneth, The Birth of Industrial Britain, Social Change 1750-1850,
London,: Pearson Longman, 2004.
Owen, Robert, Observations on the Effect of the Manufacturing System, 1815.
7