As Dick Hebdige had quoted Stuart Hall, “‘Hegemony can only be maintained so long as the dominant classes succeed in framing all competing definitions within their range’” (Hebdige 17). Dominant groups will not be satisfied with the power that is already in their possession. However, they will thrive for more, maintaining these overshadowing ideologies. Those who share similar outlook utilize hegemony the most. The dominant group is then influenced by these ideals to see the negativity in their subordinates for they have different standards.
To briefly summarize, in portraying these insecurities, the author wants to highlight the need to identify one's faults, so then they can work on rectifying them to become a better person, just as we see Holden do at the end of the novel. He wants to emphasize that becoming familiar with the struggles of the adult world isn't all bad, as we can prepare ourselves and adjust to the situation, before it becomes too much to handle. Lastly, he wants to pin point that we should not label the whole world based on a couple of people, but instead we have to broaden our horizons. To begin, the protagonist Holden Caulfield has an immensely difficult time getting over his brother's death and thus it is portrayed that he doesn’t possess the ability of letting go of the past and concentrating on the future. He instead harbors the anger, sadness and guilt of his brother's death inside him for so many years, causing him to battle with himself and blame himself for what happened.
Humans return to authority even if they have the freedom, because their answer lies in comparison. Societies’ common sense becomes higher than people’s nature, so they start to understand that for the bright future they need the authority, because the freedom is very quick and unstable moment and the source of freedom is authority. Surely, at the beginning concept of freedom is very tempting, you feel free to do everything you want. Freedom gives you opportunities to live in a way you want. However, humans’ egoism and selfishness disturb others’ freedom, because they think freedom is something that will solve their life problems and reduce responsibility from them.
Examples include money, praise, attention and getting good grades (Weiten, 2014). Operant conditioning is therefore the association between responses and their consequences. Thorndike’s principle states that favourable consequences are more likely to promote the behaviour whereas unfavourable consequences cause the person to stop that response/behaviour (Meyer et al., 2003). Operant conditioning in the case of the Lotter siblings’ behaviour would therefore propose that if their parents were very domineering and/or authoritarian, they would have been positively reinforced for listening to them and punished when they did not. This may have distorted their personality development in the interests of obtaining positive responses for submissive behaviour.
The power to decide, choose intelligently and appropriately is frequently a matter of how the problem is postured. Sometimes we try our best to choose the most logical and achievable option. But most of the times we choose the easier option to achieve our goal. Making decisions turns out to be easier when your morals and ethics are strong to you. If you make decisions based in people's opinions or beliefs then you make really dumb choices that later you will regret.
Most times, when someone vehemently disagrees with my opinion, I easily write the person off and just take my view as the better interpretation, but yet the saying, two heads are better than one, comes into play. That person might have had more experiences than me on such matters and have been through more situations pertaining to the topic that would allow them to have a better reasoning than I do. Sometimes, it is hard for me not to be biased on my own opinions from my experiences, and hopefully I can look at a viewpoint from not just my angle but through other people’s eyes to come to a better and more intellectually desired
Acting like an ethical guideline rather than a strict rulebook suggests that perhaps the golden rule doesn’t need to be taken so literally, and is more about empathy and sympathy with another’s situation. Regardless, It does have some flaws however, a large problem with the golden rule is that everyone likes being treated different ways, for example, a masochist would enjoy being hit but many other people would not, Karl Popper wrote about his ‘platinum rule: the golden rule is a good standard which is further improved by doing unto other, wherever reasonable, as they want to be done by.’ I think this is a good point because of the first criticism of the golden rule written above, however, Kant, Nietzsche and Bertrand Russel rejected this rule on a variety of grounds but the most important was its application, how can one know how others want to be treated? One could obviously ask them but this wouldn’t be widely applicable because one would have to ask every single person they interact with how they would
Iago believes that he is much more qualified, he has jealousy for Cassio that can only be because he feels like he is in competition with him. One psychologist thoughts on the subject was that,” The distrust of others and or of oneself that is experienced as jealousy usually serves the goals of PROJECTION, PROTECTION, and/or COMPETITION” (Firestone). Cassio is in much better standing with Othello than Iago is, even though throughout the play Othello seems to learn more towards the opinion of Iago. Iago has a master plan on how to get back at Othello. He decides to make it seem as though Casio and Othello’s beloved Desdemona were having a love affair.
My worldview is based off of strong morals and beliefs, but also an understanding of difference. I believe that you should stand up for yourself and protect your way of life but at the same time realize that difference is what makes the world spin. I couldn’t have asked for a better family than the one I have today. Sure they are hard on me, sure they may yell or get mad, but in the end they can see the future better than I can. Although, being able see the literal future would be pretty cool it’s not what I mean here.
Here the author should have probably listed a psychological reason that explains why humans react either positively or negatively. This might have increased the strength and acceptability of his argument. In addition, most of the arguments the author uses are inductive arguments rather than deductive arguments. This means that he relies more on probability and giving examples than on providing reasons. Deductive arguments are arguably stronger than inductive
Why try to create a committed relationship of your own, when you can just take someone else’s significant other through less than savory means? While nowadays, this may sound barbaric and sleazy, this is only so because we have been conditioned by a moral system of laws by people have also been conditioned by these laws in order to think this way. It is completely plausible