Conformity and Individualism are polar opposites and that everyone should be unique in their own way. Conformity in Fahrenheit 451 is shown that everyone is the same, while having individualism, you can be unique in your own way. Beatty says otherwise, “We must all be alike. Not everyone born free and equal, as the Constitution says, but everyone made equal. Each man the image of every other; then all are happy, for there are no
What Thoreau means by the Civil Disobedience is that every person should be govern more by his own moral compass that gives him much clearer answer to his deeds, rather than some laws of a government. “Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think we should be men first, and subjects afterward.” (1) On the first reading of such statement, one can easily agree, but it is unimaginable that it could really work in reality. It would count on every citizen being moral and righteous.
The degree to which a person feels valued determines his interaction with authority. A person is more inclined to follow authority if he feels that his purpose in the state and his opinions are considered. If a person feels neglected by his state, then he is more inclined to disobey the authorities because he recognizes his actions as insignificant. A neglected individual desires respect from his authorities. The author Thoreau explicitly argues for this type of respect for the individual in his article, “Civil Disobedience,”; he states, “Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it” (as cited in Jacobus, 1849/1998, p. 128).
Likely the most effective way in dealing with the tension would be to find Locke’s purpose in presenting this philosophy. In a time of monarchies and principalities, Locke sought to combat the tyrannical rule which led to the suffering of the lower classes. He also sought to prove the illegitimacy of monarchies as evidenced in the First Treatise of Government. Using this idea combatting monarchical rules as Locke’s likely motives, it would follow that he prioritizes maximizing the happiness of the people’s life to save them from their formerly dreadful lives. The idea of liberty seems most likely to stem from the desire to curtail the abuses made by monarchies he deemed illegitimate.
People are easily influenced and persuaded by higher authorities. Ralph Waldo Emerson was a key figure in the Transcendentalist movement. This movement promoted ideas of intuition, independence, and inherent goodness in humans and nature. His most famous essay during this time was “Self-Reliance.” Throughout the text he expresses how to avoid conformity set by our society and to follow our own individual path. Henry David Thoreau like Emerson, believed that the government abuses its control especially when it comes down to just and unjust laws.
It is believed that time is everlasting and where one life ends another begins. For as long as mankind has existed on Earth, it has been made known that each individual has their very own brains, which sends the clear message that everyone has their own mindsets and interpretation on how they choose to perceive life. Everyone is one and the same but they also have the natural ability to be the change,becoming the different that the world needs. There will never be true unification from the human race because it is in human nature to shape one’s own path to make a distinct mark whether it be visible or hidden. But it is a always worth a shot to obtain unity in the most troubling times.
Washington’s view on religion and morality is that it is essential in promoting public and private happiness, as well as political prosperity. He made his point by stating, “Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports” (Washington, 1796). This displays how he believed in the power of religion and morality because it will lead to political prosperity. In addition, he stated, “Let it simply be asked: Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice? And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion” (Washington, 1796).
Nietzsche believed that philosophy should be about jumping from one extreme to another extreme and that it should make you angry and ask questions. He identified true morality as there being a right and a wrong, and the right and wrong actions are what allow you to succeed in life. Morality as an anti-nature is people telling you what you shouldn't
Whereas groups with a scared basis turn to a supreme being for guidance or answers. Contradicting the superior Christian scriptural view that human nature was essentially corrupt and in need of divine guidance and salvation from itself, Kant and Jefferson enforced the positive view that accounted humans as centrally rational and completely able to be educated. Knowledge resulting in departure, open analysis was viewed as providing not only the basis for understanding the natural world but also for the understanding of human themselves, including their political and social selves. Furthermore, humans came to be kept exemplifying the capability as embodying the ability to consider and value the common good or morality and to provide for the social and political preparations that serve for the better of human condition. The concept of self-government had to be continued by the
To begin, human nature is claimed as a set of characteristics given to all humans, it is therefore declared essentially historical to the extent of being unchangeable. However, human development is something that is true to an individual and unique to solely himself through their decisions. It is in our human nature to be vulnerable to imperfection, such as nefarious actions. The philosophy of existentialism states that we are the creators of our own nature. Therefore, with our nature consisting of doing wrong to others, our nature allows for us to draw conjectures of why we do such horrific actions, even to the extent of the most dreadful injustices.