Final answer:
The idea of the "survival of the fittest" was articulated by Herbert Spencer, who also promoted the concept of social Darwinism. His ideas were later used to justify economic inequalities and colonialism, despite the scientific inaccuracy and moral implications. Social Darwinism has since been discredited as a pseudoscientific application of Darwinian theory.
Step-by-step explanation:
The Advocate of “Survival of the Fittest”
The thinker who advocated the idea of the “survival of the fittest” was the English philosopher, anthropologist, and sociologist Herbert Spencer. He coined this phrase to apply the concept of Darwinian evolution to human societies, which developed into the ideology known as social Darwinism. Spencer's notion implied that individuals with certain traits were more adept at surviving and therefore, more likely to pass on their traits to future generations. However, social Darwinism quickly became associated with scientific racism and was used to justify colonialism and class distinctions. By equating economic success and power with superior traits, social Darwinists such as Spencer and William Graham Sumner claimed that the wealth and position of the elites were wholly deserved, rationalizing the inequalities observed in society.
Despite the support it garnered among the wealthy and powerful during the late 19th and early 20th centuries, social Darwinism has been widely discredited. Critics argue that it provided a pseudoscientific veneer to systemic inequalities and perpetuated the mistreatment of marginalized groups. Furthermore, Charles Darwin himself did not endorse this application of his evolutionary theory, which was a misinterpretation of his research and findings in the natural sciences.
The term “survival of the fittest”, according to Herbert Spencer, was meant to reflect the adaptive capacity of individuals within the context of evolutionary biology, not the moral or social superiority of one group over another. Nevertheless, social Darwinism remains a contentious topic in the history of science and ethics due to its controversial uses in politics, economics, and social policy.