(Spencer, 1857) In contrast and in comparison the writings of Andrew Carnegie also lend to the idea of the apologist, as if his luck and ingenuity give him a special place in the world of men, and therefore he has contributed to the greater good. Carnegie, stresses that the differences between the rich and the common are necessary as the greatest will rise to the top and from this lofty height will be better judges of the common need. Carnegie was such an apologist that one of his foundational philosophies, which he lived by was that instead of blindly giving the wealth of the father to the son or the descendants at all was the most irresponsible of social actions for the very wealthy. Here he makes a distinction between the very wealthy with surplus wealth and those perceived as wealthy but who really simply have amassed just enough to maintain and help their progeny grow in the future. Carnegie makes an important statement here that through history rings true, and must here be mentioned and that is that inheritance of large sums of money tend to be a hindrance to the descendants, rather than a great thing, as without the full understanding of the philanthropic need and/or how to manage such wealth they often lose it or squander it to everyone's demise. (Carnegie, 1889)

Carnegie also admonished those who would bequeath their surplus wealth to the state, upon their death, though he is in clear support of estate or death tax as it is the official way in which the state recognizes the need for wealth to be distributed to good rather than squandered by descendants. This to him is the second, slightly better...

Carnegie instead build the case for a manner of philanthropy that emphasizes the natural skill of the successful Social Darwinist who has built the surplus in the first place. (Carnegie, 1889)
Carnegie stresses that the Gospel of Wealth is one that makes the amasser of such wealth completely and totally responsible for what he has created. After minimal accommodations to ensure that your most unprotected descendants are supported through your life and death, where he stresses helping wives and daughters the most and giving little if any nominal support to sons, who hold the social responsibility and ability of creating their own wealth in life and are often simply corrupted by freely given inheritance, the cream of the crop must dispense his surplus wealth himself, while he lives, on good works. The best possible social action of the successful Social Darwinist is to give what you have amassed through the wisdom that you have gained building said fortune. Spencer and Carnegie do not outright disagree, in the natural order determining the success and progress of man in these two works yet, Carnegie caries the idea to an extreme, making it the responsibility of those who have risen to the top to offer such opportunities to the new generation of people, who through natural selection will succeed the present. (Carnegie, 1889) (Spencer, 1857)