It is to my understanding that Theodore Dalrymple’s main argument is that civilization and culture is precious and should be conserved and defended. He brings to mind the question of “Why do we do the tasks we do and how does it compare to the bigger picture?” It is important for human beings of set societies to vitalize and protect their identity. Barbarians and brutes will exist as long as mankind does and will lash out upon societies when they feel threatened or unjustified and as long as there are these brutes and barbarians, there will be destruction. Dalrymple argues that we must not let the wrath of barbarians corrupt or even abolish civilization or a civilization’s culture. History has shown that groups or factions have tried to wipe out a race of people, enslave them or just plain revolt after years of cruelty and justification. The destruction of people and/or their culture is a means for a group to try and erase that civilizations’ identity or existence. Dalrymple believes that brutes destroy art, musical equipment, buildings, etc. as a way to and lower the value of a civilization’s culture or environment.
Men have brutish ways of thinking and behaving but it is important for man to suppress those instincts and to behave in accordance of society. It is known but not understood how effective laws and the authority play a role in keeping order and peace. Man is at battle with himself in terms of civilization versus barbarianism. Mankind has those urges and temptations to give into their inner beast but it is the control and suppression of those feelings and thoughts that help separate the man from beast. When man can control himself and help to further himself and others in his community in accordance to the laws set in ...
... middle of paper ...
...st of the many in mind? These kinds of actions and situations are prevalent in our world. This is why the author argues that civilization is worth defending.
As I said above, the meaning of civilization and freedom is changing, and it happens daily. I agree that people who don’t want to learn from the past will lose much more than what they want. But on the other hand, there is still hope to be found. Even though the spirit of civilization has been forgotten, people can cooperate in networks now to connect and communicate. When an event or disaster occurs, people can gather on the internet, and make public forums to either help or hurt the cause. I don’t necessarily like to network via the internet, but if it is a means for people to come together and connect then maybe not all hope is lost for civilization and it’s a small but gradual step towards uniting as one.
They are spatial versus temporal in orientation; attachment to versus ownership of particular lands or territory; community focused versus individual gain; and a consistent notion of the interrelatedness of humans with versus stewardship over the rest of creation. (p. 7) Tinker states, “these four cultural identifiers are so interconnected that any damage to one cultural aspect extends the damaging effect to the other three.” (p. 9) His focus is obviously on the first peoples, although this phenomenon can arguably be true for both cultures. In fact, it is the clash of these bi-polar stances that have inflicted the most genocidal damages. For instance, the temporal view of Euro-American culture kept greed, in all its forms, alive. Ownership of lands and territory took center stage due to a combination of the theology of stewardship over the untamed west and the need for more land and resources becoming more obvious in the eyes of the colonizing. Thusly, the individual attainment of land followed suit. These cultural elements of the Euro-Americans led to years of genocidal attacks on the Native
The peacekeeping law is “the law that keeps the community from turning into the howling chaos the Takers imagine it to be” (118). This law promotes and protects life for all living things to grow and prosper in a community and is extremely important to a community 's stability. One branch of the family of Homo sapiens sapiens, specifically the Takers, believe that they are exempt from this law and are purposely breaking it which is dangerous to species within the community and the survival of them. Man’s excuse for breaking this law is that there is fundamentally something wrong with people and human nature itself.
The idea that a single person’s actions can resonate and intrude into other people’s lives is a concept not often though about. Being that each of us has our own individual life to worry about, it is hard to imagine that we are all deeply interconnected to others within the human race. We often tend to only think of ourselves and our immediate families; disregarding our relationship to everyone else in this world. Each one of us holds a position in life in which we all influence one or more persons. Depending on the amount of a power a person holds certain people can influence an even wider range of others. These positions do not always have to do with a career or a job, as socioeconomic positions are fair play in this world (a rich man of resources exudes more power and influence than a homeless man). Even though those who hold more power in society actions and personality can also influences more people than one may think. A person’s occupation can also establish a connection with others which allows for influence. Since people are highly interconnected to others and their surroundings, we must approach the decisions we make with regard to the preservation of morality. Certainly we have law, however it is the duty of the people to make the right choices and to teach doctrines that do not threaten or hurt others. Individuals yield more power than they think they do, as many are influenced by the ways that others approach things. In Susan Griffin’s “Our Secret” and the critically acclaimed film “Babel”, the way in which people are connected seems to be a consistent theme though out both of the texts. In these works we see how the actions or decisions of a single person can influence and corrupt the lives of many.
Sometimes, people don’t want to be part of deviance but they find themselves going against the law because of the situation they face or their background influences. Everybody has choice to whether get involved or not in the deviance. Sociologists, through their researches show how it can happen and what can be factors to help individuals to stay in the right
Through my research and findings of obedience to authority this ancient dilemma is somewhat confusing but needs understanding. Problem with obedience to authority has raised a question to why people obey or disobey and if there are any right time to obey or not to obey. Through observation of many standpoints on obedience and disobedience to authority, and determined through detailed examination conducted by Milgram “The Perils Of Obedience,” Doris Lessing “Group Minds” and Shirley Jackson “The Lottery”. We have to examine this information in hopes of understanding or at least be able to draw our own theories that can be supported and proven on this subject.
I think that the biggest cause of Rome’s decline was the Barbarians strategy for war. The Romans conquered the barbarians and they were allowed to join the army because the Roman army was too stretched throughout the land that they owned. So because the Barbarians did not have a good strategy, they lost a war with the Visigoths. This led to the sack of Rome. So that is why I think that the Barbarians knowledge about war led to the decline of Rome.
For Fanon, the proof of the native’s humanity consisted not in “the willingness to kill settlers, but in the willingness to risk his or her own life. ‘The colonized man’, he wrote, ‘finds his freedom in and through violence’. (Fanon, 1967; 33).
A large amount of ancient texts contain themes relating to violence, power, and war, while others, such as The Bhagavad Gita and Confucius’ Analects, focus on individual and collective development through a series of selfless acts. The two texts provide an in-depth system of duties and learning created to provide direction for the betterment of the self, as well as society as a whole. The Bhagavad Gita places a greater focus on the duties of individuals that must be fulfilled to achieve an enlightened state with the divine forces. Contradictory consequences are presented for those who choose to act in an egotistical manner and deny their duties. Confucius’ Analects, on the other hand, places its main focus on collective development and responsibility
In days of old, kings created laws in order to keep peace. Most of the laws were set for selfish reasons. As history progressed people felt that they were being ruled unfairly. So should laws even exist if there will always be someone who is receiving the “short end of the stick”? Is it not the purpose, of laws and rights, to help people live in a safe environment? This is the main purpose of laws; to keep order. The governments that we have today have so many laws because they keep trying to solve problems by creating more and more laws. There are even laws for creating laws. However, although they are supposed to be in the best interest of the people, laws limit their free will. Laws tell a person what they can or cannot do. Unfortunately, they are still essential because they keep most citizens safe. So therefore, set laws, although essential, limit the free will of people no matter how sophisticated or organized they are. To support this, the theories and opinions of John Locke, Hobbes, Voltaire, and Plato will be presented. The first three of these philosophers lived at approximately the same time period and all support the essentiality of laws, although they limit free will. Plato lived much earlier but still has his own views on government and how it should be run. This paper will use their theories o...
Obedience is also seen by many as the path of least resistance; it isn’t as mentally demanding to follow someone’s orders. Assuming authority figures know what is best for everyone, it is simpler to do what we are told than to have to think for ourselves. But once we stop thinking for ourselves and begin following orders bli...
...of civilizations fitted the modern world dynamics. In the mid-term election in 2006, the American voters challenged the clash of civilizations by opposing to Bush Administration's policy towards Iraq (Kellner, 2004). – 3 (spelling punctuation,wordiness)
There are three principle causes of quarrel in the nature of man. They are competition, diffidence (or distrust), and glory. In human nature, competition is for gain, diffidence is for safety, and glory is for reputation. It is the competitive human nature that renders people apt to invade and destroy one another. The reading gives and example of a man who arms himself when taking a journey, locks his doors when he goes to sleep, and locks his chest even when he’s home. He is trying to protect himself from others competing against him for what he has. The reading give another example of how governments and leaders have their weapons pointed at the enemy at all times and how leaders continually spy on their neighbors. This is true because for years the US and Russia have had weapons pointed at each other and the U.
the laws of man and kept in check by society's own norms. The human struggle to
There simply is no alternate system of laws that can maintain the calm and peaceful environment for people of the world besides “law”. One can easily see the need for each and every nation to enforce its own set of rules. While all of the countries of the world have their own individuality – they all have one considerable feature which is a system of law. It has no significance what type of government is the command, the rules are all appropriate to the people in their community.
Nature has placed mankind under the governance of two sovereign masters, pain and pleasure. It is for them alone to point out what we ought to do as well as to determine what we shall do (225) 1.