Disobedience As A Psychological And Moral Problem By Erich Fromm Summary

In Fromm 's essay "Disobedience as a Psychological and Moral Problem" he talks about the reason why people are obedient. Fromm states that they are obedient because most people do not have enough courage to be alone. Whey they are obedient, it makes them feel secure because they are accepted by society. On the other hand, disobedience is not accepted by society, so if people disobey, they become an outsider. For instance, if a person is raised to think that stealing is wrong, they have also witnessed how others who do steal are treated by society. Because they know that they will be treated badly by the society they are less likely to steal. Overall, I agree with what Fromm says because I am less likely to be disobedient because I do not want to be looked down upon by society.

Disobedience has always been a pesky human trait. It has led to the downfall of empires and the establishment of new ones. In his claim about disobedience, Oscar Wilde is correct because disobedience leads to positive changes that would not have occurred otherwise.

Disobedience Throughout the World Oscar Wilde claims that disobedience is a valuable human trait. He also argues that disobedience promotes social progress and will continue to promote social progress and reform. Disobedience is the failure or refusal to obey rules or someone in authority. It has caused many historical events throughout time and our world would not be the same without it.

Like Martin Luther King Jr once said “One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.” With these words in mind, I affirm the resolution resolved: Civil disobedience in a democracy is morally justified. I offer the following definitions to help clarify the round: Civil disobedience is nonviolent refusal to follow the laws or demands of government to prove a point and the person participating in civil disobedience has to accept the consequences. A democracy is a government by the people, where the people elect representatives or the leader. Not everyone has to vote in a democracy but, the leaders or representatives have to be decided by the majority of eligible voters. Morally is doing the right thing based on the morals of the people

The greatest revolutionaries of the United States of America, both past and present, answer to values, principles of American culture and widely-accepted beliefs. They do not answer to laws. The belief that obedience to laws is a sign of patriotism is deeply flawed in the fact that the original patriots of the thirteen colonies were everything except obedient to their government. In the ideal democracy, the core values, moral justices, of the people will be reflected in the laws of the nation. When a split in laws and moral justice occurs, it is the right and obligation of the people of said nation to act as Samuel Adams, John Hancock, and Thomas Jefferson; it is their duty to disobey.

Civil Disobedience What is civil disobedience? What does it do? Why is it important? Is it a right thing? These few questions might pop into one 's head when they hear civil disobedience.

Disobedience can be defined as failure or refusal to obey rules or someone in authority. Disobedience can also be defined as causing a disarray within society and causing a shift in social normals to more perfectly suit the conditions of a community at a given time, in the sense that it promotes the questions of poor social norms, and the change in our mortal standards and by the progressive though of one’s own mind. Oscar Wilde argues that it can allow society to progress and to allow science about different or certain topics to be broken or misplaced, and the way that it counter our social norms instead of disobedience leading to be a negative human and societal trait in our very way of life. He also argues about how disobedience can lead

Henry David Thoreau’s “On the Duty of Civil Disobedience” (first presented in 1848 and first published 1849) insists, — “That government is best which governs least”, or alternatively, — “That government is best which governs not at all.” Thoreau develops and supports his thesis statement by explaining what government is at best (an expedient) and usually is (inexpedient), and by giving a specific and current example to his readers. The author’s purpose was to educate the masses regarding civil disobedience, teaching them not only that it’s allowed, but that it’s a duty upon them in order to create an ideal government or even world. Thoreau’s intended audience is clearly the people who, as Thoreau himself said, “would not have consented to

Throughout history, civil disobedience has helped societies grow and accept social reforms. The case of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Letter from Birmingham Jail, is an important formal written statement for the need of social change. Civil disobedience has been a useful leveraging tactic in ways to draw attention to the perceived injustice. It has had huge impacts on societies in ways to create tension that

During this day I believe that I would take up Martin Luther King's view on civil disobedience as my own because I see just how he said that not all laws that are legal are just. I believe that not all that is made law is just for all people but only make it just for the majority. King view on civil disobedience is more suitable for this day and age that why people would try to follow his example if they would have to take up civil disobedience.

Civil disobedience has been discerned in numerous time periods of American history. The definition of disobedience can be interpreted when one or a group prioritizes their conscience of their beliefs over the dictation of laws through rebellion. Notable historical events of slavery and independence has been marked with the disobedience of government laws. Even though the disobedience of societal laws can undermine the corruption of the government, disobedience has undeniably steer societal progress.

I believe that civil disobedience is good for the advancement of the American society. This a simple fact which has been proven many times by history all around the world. A few examples of important historical participants and leaders in civil disobedience include Mohandas Gandhi, Susan B. Anthony, Martin Luther King Jr., Rosa Parks and much more. Mohandas Gandhi was an Indian man who spent his life protesting the unjust anti-Indian law in Britan using, you guessed it, civil disobedience. Most importantly on March 30, 1930, when he lead a defiance march to the sea. His efforts caused India to gain its independence in 1947. This happened in the very year he went on a hunger strike. Susan B. Anthony was one of the world most famous suffragettes in American history.

Throughout Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience,” it is evident that his stance on wealth is firm. He believes that “the rich man…is always sold to the institution which makes him rich” (Thoreau 9). The rich are said to be the ones less likely to practice civil disobedience because they have conformed to the government, prospering under it. On the other hand, Thoreau is not entirely hateful towards the wealthy. He explains that “the best thing a man can do for his culture when he is rich is to endeavor to carry out those schemes which he entertained when he was poor” (Thoreau 10). Because the rich are normally those who have power, his stance on that particular matter put him in a dangerous position. Thoreau had great influence on future leaders.

This story ¨The Veldt¨ shows disobedience in many ways. Disobedience means failure or refusal to obey rules or someone in authority. In the story ¨The Veldt¨ by Ray Bradbury the problem is that the kids are addicted to a nursery and how the nursery works is whatever the kids think happens in the nursery and the parents have no control over their children to stop going in the nursery. As the story goes on the parents decide that the house is too much for the family and want to move out. In the end the kids end up having no more parents do to the kids actions. I believe that the parents couldn 't save the family (3 reasons)

We have been trained to be obedient to authority. This quality is deep-rooted in us all from the manner in which we were brought up. It is natural for people to obey orders from those whom they recognized as their authority. This is the natural response to legitimate authority and can be learnt in a variety of situations. In a summary written in the article “The Perils of Obedience” (Milgram 1974), states: “The legal aspects of obedience are of enormous import, but they say very little about how most people behave in concrete situations.”