Have you ever felt like your privacy has been violated and you don’t know why? Privacy now a days is a very controversial topic, everyone wants privacy and protection but do not want the consequences that come with it. This is very similar to how privacy was being violated in the novel 1984, it takes place in a orwellian society where no one decides for themselves. There are two articles “That’s no Phone, That’s my Tracker” and “This Smartphone Tracking Tech Will Give You the Creeps”, and the novel 1984 that can justify how privacy is being violated now and in the orwellian society of 1984. George Orwell really shows how privacy in his alternate world in the year 1984 is being violated.
Apart from that, Mustapha Mond is put in Brave New World so that there is someone who can manage and control a small part of the new world to ensure that the society is always safe and happy. If Mustapha Mond doesn’t exist in the novel, it would have sounded a bit too ridiculous because it would make people wonder that how could the world be in such peace and stability with no one ruling over it. Besides, there has to be someone who knows a bit about the old world in order to keep the societies away from the factors that could bring harm to the new
His gist is that privacy should be respected which makes him moderate moralism, law should only intervene when society won’t tolerate certain behaviour, law should be a minimum standard not a maximum standard and act as general guideline. Is the act of polyandry tolerable by the society? In some society it is tolerable but in some they will not. However, to abolish the act of polyandry will also intervene with the privacy on the individuals. Devlin would have thought the act of polyandry to be immoral and disintegrates the society however, being a moderate moralism he would not have wanted to intervene with the privacy of other unless the act has become very widely practiced and start causing harm to the society.
When taking a step back, the two philosophers, Simone de Beauvoir and Schopenhauer share a similar concept. Beauvoir talks about tragic ambiguity – where we are free, but not free due to external factors – and Schopenhauer talks about how life is full of punishment. Both authors seem to strongly consider that negative things can happen in the outside world. However, where Beauvoir would think that, “it is okay, it is meant to happen this way, but at least I have my sanity,” Schopenhauer would think “it is okay, it happened, but I should get used to
In Machiavelli’s book, The Prince, he maintains a harsh perspective on reality. His advice on how to maintain power leaves no room for compassion or generousity. While some may believe that these are qualities of a good person, Machiavelli believes these qualities lead to the downfall of rulers. He acknowledges that, in reality, it is impossible for someone to have qualities of a good person and simultaneously a good ruler. Machiavelli’s realistic outlook causes him to emphasize that it is better to maintain power through fear, rather than compassion.
They believe that no matter what they do, they don’t have the power or ability to change the things or events that are going to happen since it was all fated. However, with agency in human, they believe that something will be bound to changes with their action. They believe they could do something to modify the ending to anything but the known-predicted ending. Sophocles has seamlessly engaged determinism into the book through making known that Apollo’s predictions will happen to Oedipus. To King Laius and Queen Jocasta, Apollo was the mighty one; his prediction is and will be the only truth to them.
According to the wise words of James Baldwin, “the nature of society is to create, among its citizens, an illusion of safety; but it is also absolutely true that the safety is always necessarily an illusion.” He also claims that “artists are here to disturb the peace,” and the writers of the modernist era truly embody Baldwin’s expectations. (cite quote) The primary goal of the modernist movement was to invalidate the conventions that governed society because the writers believed such conventions were simply “arbitrary and fragile human constructions” (Loeffelholz 14). They did not avoid topics deemed deviant by society, for they perceived the concept of deviance itself to be subjective and simply a method used for stigmatization and control. Many modernists also sought to rectify the injustices in society through their writings. For instance, many African American writers during the modernist era wished to
According to “Utopia and Anti-Utopia” it says “That a loss of individual freedom is the cost of utopian striving.” I agree with this statement, the characters in the book possess no freedom therefore, how is it a perfect society? To go along with that statement “Freedom necessarily means that many things will be done which we do not like. Our faith in freedom does not rest on the foreseeable results in particular circumstances but on the belief that it will, on balance, release more forces for the good than for the bad” (The Giver’s Dystopia). Freedom is something we all possess in this world. Our freedom does sometimes result in negative actions, but without it we cannot be the person we want to be.
If Huck contains doubt about the rules and the structure of society, occurrences such as these only solidify his desire to be guided by his own self morality rather than following regular social norms that people like the widow and Miss Watson try to impose on him when trying to civilize Huck. When the king and the duke come to their end, Huck states, “human beings can be awful cruel to one another,” (Twain 239). The statement takes a tone of final acceptance that humans ability to care for one another and morality will never
Freedom and safety are ideals in one’s perfect world but as everyone knows this is not possible in the world we live in today. According to Cambridge Dictionary Freedom is “the condition or right of being able or allowed to do, say, think, etc. whatever you want to, without being controlled or limited” while Safety is “a state in which a place where you are safe and not in danger or at risk.” Where we live now freedom is a gift and something precious that not everyone can receive. Everyday it seems that governments seem to limit our freedom for safety yet people protest, does that mean that all people refuse safety for freedom. These changes like increasing more security in areas or preventing people from going somewhere dangerous limit our freedom.