The person that has shocked me the most is the theories Herbert Spencer. He saw the different classes of the British Empire and he wanted to know how to classify them, which is normal. He came up with a cellular difference, the rich have intelligent cells and the poor have sex cells, this seems ridiculous to me. Spencer says the only thing that should matter to the poor is survival of the fittest, why waste public mon

The next thing that has surprised me is the progress that appears after the enlightenment. Condorlet wrote mankind is perfectible and can progress through the expression of genius. Malthus says Condorlet was wrong, he says humanity will go down because of consumption, like food. These two theories seem a little bit strange to me. Condorlet's theory makes sense, but what can he say about the rest of the people? Not everyone can be a Leonardo Da Vinci. Malthus worked out his theories with some type of mathematics, but his conclusion are not likely to happen and we are living proof, so what type of math did he do?

The last thing that has surprised me is the importance of Franz Boaz. In previous Anthropology classes I have had, there was little or no mention of this name. Considering he is called the father of Anthropology and he created the fo

Some common words found in the essay are:
British Empire, Franz Boaz, Morgan Freeman, , Malthus Condorlet, Vinci Malthus, Margaret Mead, Baltic Sea, Anthropology Anthropologist, Herbert Spencer, history anthropology, father anthropology,
Approximate Word count = 571
Approximate Pages = 2 (250 words per page double spaced)