Since the leader has all the power to himself, people then resign their general will to the government. Corruption could be lessened – or better yet, eliminated – since the power is limited when it comes to those who are in a lower position. Also, processing laws are implemented faster and easier unlike the process they do in democracy wherein two or three branches have to discuss it which then takes months and even worse – years. In this type of government, protection of the people is assured wherein laws that would be better for the common good are implemented. The only problem that would be bad for this is if the dictator seated is an extreme leader who would see violence as the best way to bring peace and stability to the country.
Conclusion Ford motor company made a decision which was ethical for his company. It was a management decision that was ethical according to details of the automobile explosion. It would have been a simple decision to produce the new design and save lives. The bottom line was that ford was selling automobile and not causing people’s injuries, because of their actions. Action of others were also taken into consideration, which causes, impacts to the pinto.
Citing how the society in the story is being handicapped due to the amendments, the quote hints that the government is controlling the people and that no matter how someone may see it, that person and everyone else lacks freedom in every way. Also, recommending that dying for personal beliefs is far better than succumbing to a figures’ plans for life, it portrays exactly what Harrison did and what he received as the result of standing up for his beliefs. Thus, the sign is significant because it summarizes Harrisons actions into a powerful statement that hints at the evils ongoing in the dystopian society and how death is far better than slaving away in the conditions of the
JoJo is the evil dictator’s son who has been raised to think torturing people is perfectly okay and morally acceptable in society. JoJo is capable of acting in agreement with his deep self. As the dictator’s son can have second order desires that are reasonable but from our perspective they’re immoral. Hence, Wolf believes that majority of us would not consider JoJo accountable and responsible for his actions. This is where the deep-self view is flawed, and Wolf suggests the sane deep-self view.
Kurt Vonnegut, Jr wrote about the forced of equality, and its dangers to society. If the entire world just one day became equal, you may first find it a good change, because finally no more competition between citizens, but after some time you would realize how dangerous it could be. Being unequal from everyone else brings a lot of conflicts, but it 's worth it because that´s what makes us unique, special, and different. In the story it showed how Harrison revealed his anger to society about their choice to make everyone he same, he told the people to take their handicaps off, so they could finally get rid of this equality. For me if you actually think the story throgh, it has a good message.
Therefore, I want to prove that the citizens are better off with Big Brother as their leader. It is better to have a form of leadership, than no leadership at all. I have chosen this topic because it is new and insightful. It will be challenging to support this belief since people do not typically think about Big Brother in a positive way. What I am going to prove is a unique perspective on a traditionally negative aspect of 1984.
Both Thomas Hobbes and John Locke had different ideas about the government and human nature. When Hobbes was in the English Civil War he was convinced that humans are naturally selfish and wicked people, and without government there would be no order in the world, and there would be in chaos. Hobbs thought that the ruler need a total power to keep the people under control, which would be an absolute monarchy. John Locke on the other hand, had a different opinion, it was a more positive view on human nature. Locke thought the people can learn from their mistakes and improve themselves.
Emerson would like all the people to become more independent because if they follow the rules, they will become a slave to the laws. His main idea here was to not abide by society’s ways because conforming to society would be submitting to the government, which sets the standards of beliefs and the behaviors of society. Because it goes against Emerson’s ideas of opposition to the mainstream ways, he would want less democracy because a democracy is a group that is indirectly controlled by the agreed majority. 5. Was Emerson a liberal or conservative -- and in what ways?
For him, if our mind agreed with our voluntary actions to some law then it is considered as good but if our mind disagreed to it then it is considered as bad. Things that are good are those things which we are comfortable to deal with and things that are bad are those things that we could not fathom; pain and sorrows. In 19th century (late modern period) Moral philosophy is still a huge shot for the philosophers. Immanuel Kant demonstrated his thoughts about morality and rationality. For him as a rational being, one would not only ask for the right thing to do yet would also make a list on the things that he/she would want to attain in life or in other words, things that he/she would ought to do.
A representative democracy is the best way to keep society out of the state of nature, and still preserve individuals’ rights. The flaws that exist in the argument presented in Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes stem from the fact that a singular leader cannot be trusted to create just covenants. While that one individual can remove society from the state of nature, their own human nature will trigger members of society to invoke their right of nature. Thus taking society back into the undesired state of nature. The best way to prevent this cycle is creating a representative democracy where a multitude of people have power, making it more likely for the laws covenants that are created to be just for all of