In the essay “The Public and the Common good” by James Howard Kunstler after reading the introduction the paragraph and evaluating carefully, I believe that it is not an effective introduction. One reason is The Arthur's does State the problem but, He also gives a list of several other problems that he thinks is wrong with the United States government and the way people are treated thought out the nation’s communities. This authors several topic he to discuss was not all related bring it together no resolutions for the different topics. The author does not give an implied solution of how to solve the listed problems that he has acknowledged. By giving you a list of problem in his introduction without solution the author this could give assume
James Howard Kunstler begins his work, “The Geography of Nowhere,” at a top speed and continues from there. He starts chapter one, Scary Place, by describing the story of Judge Doom from “Who Framed Roger Rabbit?”, which is the fictional character that is supposedly responsible for Los Angeles becoming taken over by the freeways. He then continues quoting Lewis Mumford, who was basically the dean of American urban academics in the beginning of the 1900s. He gloomily predicted, would completely demoralize mankind and lead to the nuclear holocaust (p. 10).
One such solution is the establishment of moral superiority of our criminal justice professionals over our ordinary citizens. It also discussed the decriminalization of victimless crimes, so that our prisons have more room for violent offenders. Another possibility discussed in this section was the equal distribution of wealth to allow youths access to better schooling and more, realistic, opportunities for the lower class to move up in society. In addition to providing possible solutions it also addressed the reasons that these solutions would not be feasible, mostly that these recommendations would create too much competition against the
We all have curious questions and speculations about what is going to happen on Earth in the next few centuries. We all wonder what is going to be affected and how much of it is going to be affected by the rising speed of global warming. In this book, “The Long Emergency,” by James Howard Kunstler, he discusses what he thinks about “what is happening, what will happen, or what is likely to happen,” rather than what he wishes would happen in the future. He discusses his extreme concerns about the “modern” way of living, in which it may result in a depression for the economy. Kunstler negatively exaggerates many factors that can lead to what many people may usually think to be the “end of the world,” or an apocalypse. The book is mainly centered on the struggles of the cheap-oil age ending, and rebuilding our society with other energy sources for a sustainable way of living. After each argument, it seems that the foundation Kunstler constantly refers back to is that cheap oil is running out.
In Miroslav Volf’s book titled A Public Faith, the malfunction tendencies are greatly discussed, as is how Christians should live out their faith in the public live. He makes the point that with the growth of religions, their followers are also trying to spread their traditions and beliefs to others. The level in which a religion does this can be explained by Volf as idleness or coercion.
The democracy of the United States today is deeply intertwined with a utilitarian mindset. The ideals formed by the many thinkers/writers of the 18h-19th century can still be seen as prevalent in today’s society. The enlightened philosophes of the 17th-18th century had paved the way for a new form of political system. The idea of utilitarianism was preached by a number of prestigious writers, including John Stuart Mill, Jeremy Bentham, and the United States own John Adams. This school of thought made its way to the United States early in the nation’s history and is deeply rooted within the origins of our great country.
In his paper Desire and the Human Good, Richard Kraut argues that the typical defense for pluralism, Desire Satisfaction Theory, is too weak; subsequently Kraut offers his own alternative. In this paper I will explain Desire Satisfaction Theory as Kraut opposes it, defend the objections made by Kraut against Desire Satisfaction Theory, and evaluate his alternative theory.
Arguments about fairness and justice have been up for debate for centuries. "What do we deserve?", a question that has many individuals raising their brows to their efforts in their pursuit to achieve their goals. If it is said that we are all placed on an equal standard why are there individuals struggling to stay afloat? In Arora’s essay, he examines three forms of economic modals of social justices that question that idea of why the prosperous or the impecunious "deserve" their position or stature in life. Out of all of Arora's economic modals that he presents the Meritocratic System is the fairest because it gives everyone a fighting chance.
In this passage, the audience truly sees the meaning behind Herbert Kohl's message. His purpose for writing comes back to the fact that people interpret situations differently in every way. Kohl not only wanted to highlight the purpose behind wanting to learn something new but he also wanted readers to be aware that most time it does not come down to the inability of someone who doesn't want to learn but the real reason behind why they don't want to. People have different opinions on topics such as these but Kohl wanted to show that being able to want to stand up for your culture and the meanings behind it are rather important. Behind Kohl's purpose for writing, we see an insight into his past life relating to Wilfredo's. Kohl's reason for
1. I think your essay was not written too informally at all. It was relatable in a way that wasn't so casual. I not only understood where you were coming from with your arguments but I also found an agreement in what your overall takeaway was. It was a message that was not harsh in the sense of being a horrible human being but in regaining the strength and social status of society itself.
The problem is to find a form of association … in which each, while uniting
Globalisation’s Time is Up (The Guardian Weekly, 12-18 Aug. 2005), by James Howard Kunstler, starts off with a direct contradiction of Thomas Friedman’s statement, that globalisation1 is here to stay. Kunstler argues that globalization is not “a permanent fixture of the human condition” (1) and only persists under specific circumstances; the presence of “relative world peace” (1) and “reliable supplies of cheap energy” (1). The essay begins with Kunstler stating the premises for globalization’s stability and evolves into a superficial analysis of what Kunstler intends to be historically analogous examples. The audience is taken back to a productive phase of globalization (1870s-1914) as Kunstler illustrates a world possessing relative peace
...my own family. After reading and completing the essay I realize that maybe my thought process is not necessarily that right or valuable one to have. I believe it would be important to make sure that the underprivileged did not go hungry and I would not want to be selfish. I do not agree in equality but I do think assisting others is the proper thing to do. I think I can conceptualize bringing all three points of view together to create one idea. It’s difficult for me now to make a decision on where I stand with distributive justice because I see both the good and bad in all of the arguments so, I would take the valuable arguments and create something different that holds true to what I feel is justified and reasonable.
A primary problem with the society we live in today, is the need to be better.
The Public Choice For some parents, deciding on a school for their children can be a difficult decision. Many parents do not spend much time thinking about it; they place their children into the local school designated by where they live. Others attended a private school themselves and found that it was a beneficial experience and therefore want the same for their kids. But which is better: private schools or public schools? While there are many advantages and disadvantages to each (nothing is going to be absolutely perfect), we are going to focus on the benefits of an education in the public school system, or in other words, schools funded by the government that are for anyone to attend.
“Many people want the government to protect the consumer. A much more urgent problem is to protect the consumer from the government”. Here Milton Friedman, American economist and a famous writer share his views about the society or government who is responsible for the protection of the people. Most of the people in this world are familiar with the word society. The term society describes a group of people as the members of certain communities for several events. We live in a society and without society we cannot develop our own individual behavior. In other words an ideal society can also be known as a perfect society which can provide basic needs to the people living within their respected communities. Different types of societies prevail in this world today. Some are religious, cultural, charitable, professional as well as economic. But there are advantages and disadvantages to these societies. For instance, being in a society will increase teamwork, cooperation, open to anyone, regardless of race, sex, religion and it is easy to form. On the other hand, it will limit your ability of working individually, problems arise when some families in the community fail to contribute money and the lack of secrecy since almost every matter is discussed openly in meetings. Authors such as Milton Friedman and Jane Jacobs describes about societies in detail and how it should be through their famous books, free to choose and the death and life of great American cities.