The “Gospel of Wealth”, an article by Andrew Carnegie, includes multiple perspectives on the usage of money. Specifically, the author advocates the essential utilization of the central philanthropic principles, emphasizing the importance of spending money wisely. In that way, wealthy people are encouraged to donate their money to charities and use any resources to decrease the gap between lower- and upper-classes. Carnegie accentuates the idea that such philanthropy will aid in binding “the rich and poor in harmonious relationship” (Carnegie 1). The notable impact of spending money for good causes is reiterated throughout the article. Hence, the author presents his main argument on benevolent methods of reducing wealth inequality through specific examples and principles, which strengthen his reasoning.
Carnegie’s effective technique to share his ideas involves references to personal experiences. In this way, the author primarily highlights the previous similarities between people of different socio-economic classes, which are not apparent anymore. While explaining this issue, Carnegie refers to a memory of “visiting the Sioux” (Carnegie 2). He hardly noticed any major differences between wealthier people and their neighbors with lower income during the visit. Through this anecdotal example, the author is able to demonstrate his personal involvement with the issue. Carnegie creates the necessary foundation for the following argument development. The Sioux visit story is linked to several assumptions about why modern wealthy people do not try to fit in with others, and instead only display their wealth. In the end, this structure allows for Carnegie’s argument to be proven while also demonstrating his personal engagement with the issue.
Furthermore, the article’s main idea is clearly highlighted through several specific principles outlined by the author. Firstly, Carnegie describes the concept of inheritance as “the most injudicious” (Carnegie 3). He explains that this way of handling money across generations leads to common socio-economic inequality problems for various communities. Therefore, this method of money spending is portrayed negatively to accentuate its ineffectiveness in making beneficial changes in the world. Secondly, Carnegie specifies that money should be donated for public causes by one before their death. The author comments that “….it becomes of much good in the world”, clearly presenting the mentioned method as a more beneficial alternative to money inheritance (Carnegie 3). Lastly, the solution involving rich people organizing fundraising events and using their resources for good causes is clearly stated. Carnegie favors this method for its direct impact on people’s lives and because it “produces the most beneficial results for the community” (Carnegie 3). Hence, the author directly states his point of view by using specific methods and examples.
Overall, Carnegie’s arguments provide a solid foundation for resolving socio-economic inequality issues. The reader is persuaded to question their own ethical stance through several key techniques. By providing personal examples regarding his own observations and experiences, the author contemplates how the issue of wealth differences in society has changed over the years. Although this strategy is highly biased and not based on statistical data, it effectively serves as a link between two points. On the other hand, the author also outlines specific ways through which rich people should utilize their wealth. This argument additionally describes how inheritance and other popularized traditions can develop into various socio-economic issues. Therefore, the summation of these strategies strengthens Carnegie’s central argument about using money for benevolent reasons.
Work Cited
Carnegie, A. “The Gospel of Wealth”. North American Review, 1889.