‘Amen’ “ (Rand 21). This motto prevents the idea of equity by saying they should all be the same. It is taking away the idea of individuality and fails the society members. The society is attempting to make all equal however that is nearly impossible to actually do. Both pieces fail their societies by trying to make everyone and everything the
Bradbury uses this line to show how natural conformity has become in their society; the desire to please authority comes even before self-indulgence, another strong value of their culture. If everyone surrenders themselves to authority, then they would have a power that no one else could ever vanquish; the power over other people. Bradbury warns with this totalitarian government that putting all of oneself into the hands of other people can eventually become dangerous; conformity to the wills of power demolishes individuality and all future hope of change in the future. Even if the people decide they want otherwise in the future, they have already locked themselves too far into a system to ever
John Dos Passos once said, “Individuality is freedom lived.” The root of individuality lies in freedom. Without freedom, there is an inability to think for oneself and share one’s ideas. In a society where this freedom is lacking, people will not think for themselves and submit to whatever rule is enforced over them. In Fahrenheit 451, the government attempts to control freedom as a means towards reaching a perfect society. The “perfect” society that is created, comes at the cost of individuality.
In the novel, One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest by Ken Kesey, Randle McMurphy is a great protagonist and nonconformist against the antagonist, Nurse Ratched. I believe that a great protagonist will be, in some way, a nonconformist because if a protagonist was conformist, there most likely would be no reason for an antagonist to arise; also when a protagonist is a nonconformist it gives them nobility. The greatest protagonists, lastly, are those who bring change to the world for the better, which is brought by nonconformists. If the protagonist was a conformist, there mostly likely wouldn’t be any reason for the antagonist to arise. Antagonists are very important to the plot line of a story; in order for most antagonists to emerge, a protagonist needs to first materialize as a nonconformist.
Fortunately our society is a world of free thought, progressivism, and freedom. With that being said, Aldous Huxley’s fears of conditioning and conformity do not root back into the lack of individuality in our civilization that he foresaw. Huxley feared that our society would be filled with brain-washed and thoughtless beings who could never think for themselves. Today that is not the case. However, Huxley had a good reason to fear as his dystopian novel Brave New World, showed off depictions of what could happen if the world was as conditioned in a way that was written.
“… [Humans] don’t have a ‘nature,’ contrary to all other beings and things in the universe; we exist in the world, with freedom to choose our path, and thus our existence precedes our essence. But that puts us in a state of anguish, from which we would like to escape (in bad faith), but we cannot, because we are condemned to be free” (Rosenstand, 2018, p. 515). Jean-Paul Sartre’s philosophy of virtue ethics stands in contraction to many, believing that human life is without predetermined meaning, whether by divine appointment or via evolutionary growth. Sartre further defines this history debating, “… man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world – and defines himself afterwards… Man simply is… Man is nothing else but that which he makes of himself… [and] that it puts every man in possession of himself as he is, and places the entire responsibility for his
Henry David Thoreau begins his essay Resistance to Civil Government, also known as Civil Disobedience, by stating that governing forces rarely demonstrates itself as useful and that they obtain power from the majority of people simply because the majority is the strongest group, not because their viewpoint is the most reasonable. Thoreau argues that government only exists for the sole purpose of guaranteeing freedom for individuals. He states that he simply wishes for a better government, not to abolish it. The rule of expediency, in Thoreau’s case, can be defined as government officials putting themselves before citizens so that they themselves can be more practical and convenient. Thoreau believes the rule of expediency is an unsatisfactory
To begin Rousseau starts the reading by saying that there cannot be a legitimate political authority because political authority puts restraints of freedoms that man was born with, Rousseau says that man was born with one natural form of authority, and that is the authority of a father over a child which exist only to keep the child alive all other authorities are rejected. The reasoning that some philosophers such as Hobbes assume that natural superiority of rulers over the ruled is the same as parental authority. However, Rousseau believes that this authority has no basis in nature because they use force to keep it. Rousseau says that the only answer to this problem is through some social contract made between members of society where people surrender their freedom
His hyperconsciousness gives him superiority over the average citizens in society due to their logic based decisions since he rejects logic because he concludes that a utopian society is absolutely unreachable and absurd. Since the Underground man believes he has more intelligence due to his free will, he convinces himself that he has a duty to assert his power over others. Furthermore, his free will do to as he pleases is true power
He said “the life of the instinctive man is shut up within the circle of his private interests. But, if our life is to be great and free, we must escape this prison. The main way of doing so is through knowledge, because all acquisition of knowledge is an enlargement of the Self. Through knowledge our mind becomes capable of that union with the universe which constitutes its highest good. Knowledge makes us citizens of the universe, and in this citizenship of the universe consist man’s true freedom, and his liberation from the thraldom of narrow hopes and fears.” Aristotle and Russell have not just talked about knowledge but what they have proposed is the ultimate purpose and meaning