Every ideology, whether it is conservatism, environmentalism, or fascism, has its own basic notion or conception of human nature. According to our textbook, human nature is defined as “some notion of basic human drives, motivations, limitations, and possibilities” (Ball and Dagger, 2011, p. 8). These different views of human nature are important as they form the basis for many of the varying ideologies throughout the world. Two significant ideologies which we as a class have extensively studied the past few months include radical Islamism and welfare liberalism. Followers of these two ideologies have similar, and yet differing, conceptions of human nature. In the following essay, I will compare and contrast radical Islamism’s conception of human nature with that of welfare liberalism and identify any differences. I will also explore how different conceptualizations of human nature inform or shape the types of political institutions, policies, or governments we observe in today’s political world.
For adherents of radical Islamism, their views of human nature were established on religious beliefs (Ball and Dagger, 2011, p. 290). In essence, “Islam shares the view that there is one God who created the heavens, the earth, and all its creatures, including human beings. Humans are by nature weak and prone to sin. To overcome temptation faithful Muslims must engage in jihad, the struggle against evil” (Ball and Dagger, 2011, p. 291). Some of the ways Muslims do this is by praying five times a day, fasting during Ramadan, giving to the poor, making at lease one pilgrimage to Mecca during their lifetime, and faithfully devoting their lives to Allah (Ball and Dagger, 2011, p. 291). However, this “struggle” against human’s sin...
... middle of paper ...
...also why countries such as Saudi Arabia do not have a legally binding constitution, and the Quran reins supreme. Governments and policies such as these would not have developed in primarily Muslim countries if it were not for the ideas of human nature which form the basis of the ideologies found there. We are told, “Other Ideologies take other views of human nature, but in every case the program a political ideology prescribes is directly related to its core conception of human nature--to its notion of what human beings are truly like and what they can achieve” (Ball and Dagger, 2011, p. 9). It should be clear why different conceptions of human nature matter.
Learning about the different ideologies and the various conceptions of human nature that they hold can tell us a lot about why certain political situations are happening as they are in the world today.....
When a group uses religious ideology to control a population, the religious texts, in the case the Qur’an, are usually interpreted to suit the agenda of the group, because “they have different values and beliefs”2. The reason that the texts are used and intentionally misinterpreted is fairly obvious. Iran, where 99% of the population is Muslim, coupled with the fact that Muslims believe that the Qur’an is the word of god, one who can...
...r actions, names, and surroundings. Ideologies help explore different values and morals, but society cannot prove one to be better than another. Yes, each individual can have separate opinions and beliefs, but they will only find happiness if they focus on their own thoughts instead of fighting a never-ending battle towards a perfect society.
... and Jihad According to Islam." HWeb. HWeb, 13 June 2006. Web. 05 Nov. 2013. .
While there is no precise definition of the term, the meaning of Jihad is far more complex. In fact, the term Jihad generally refers to the struggle one must undertake as one “strive[s] in the path of God” (Church 110). That struggle is defined both externally and internally. As so, they are classified in terms of an external struggle with enemies or non believers, or an internal struggle with oneself to reject greed and temptation. While popular opinion has been misconstrued to see Jihad as a malevolent, violent action; a serious investigation of the term’s historical and religious background reveals a multi-defined word.
- It takes the traditions of that time and only changes them gradually and not very
Growing up in a very conservative home could have led me to carry on the political beliefs of my parents, but for me that is not quite what happened. My parents were very good people who worked hard for what they had. Both my mother and father were deeply religious, and church was always mandatory for all five of their children. Through their faith, they developed an often benevolent disposition with others, but I noticed at a very young age that judgement seemed to accompany their actions. My parents were the type of people that would offer a ride to a stranger, or give a few dollars to someone standing on the corner with a “will work for food” sign. Those actions always made me a very proud daughter, but when they would discuss their
While Burnham and the PNC were experimenting with its foreign relations, the PPP had moved even further 'left' with its formal induction into the Communist International in July 1969. These developments were partially the result of that party’s increasingly pro Soviet stance, sealed and formalized with its public entry into the Soviet International in 1969. This was after Dr. Jagan returned from a Conference of Communist and Workers Parties in Moscow in the same year. Thereafter, the PPP became a disciplined adherent of doctrinaire Marxism and the long-standing Marxist-Leninist organisation became even more prominent on committees of the Communist International ranging from the World Peace Council to the World Federation of Free Trade Unions (WFTU) and acquired easy access to senior personnel in the Kremlin.
There is a strong belief that Islam and politics are directly tied. They are tied in the sense that the building blocks of the religion dictate how they ought to behave in the political environment. Through this mandatory follow up behavior that the religion delineates, many have come to believe that its teachings are a form of terrorism. Mandaville argues that what has challenged the Islamic link between politics and religion was the emergence of secularism, which went against the belief that politics and religion could go together. Islam has been a religion that has been accused of supporting terrorist activities in the world. Different assumptions have been brought up to understand better the linkages between what really lies behind the Islam religion and politics. Peter Mandaville argues that Islam is dynamic and that it has changed over time; situated within time and politics.
With the use of the word Jihad by men such as Saddam Hussein or Osama bin Laden, many people believe that Jihad highlights the violent nature of Muslim people. However, in its pure form, Islam is not at all violent. Muslims are taught to fulfill Jihad through four methods: the heart, the tongue, the hand, and the sword (Jihad 2). The first is the internal struggle to cleanse oneself of internal evil. Fulfilling Jihad through heart and hand are directed more toward supporting what is right and correcting which is wrong. Raising the sword in defense of Islam is only prescribed when all other methods have failed and Muslims have come under attack. A passage in the Quran, the holy book of Islam, states, "Fight for the sake of God those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. God does not love the aggressors"(Van Voorst 311). However, there ...
Aristotle, Locke, and Hobbes all place a great deal of importance on the state of nature and how it relates to the origin of political bodies. Each one, however, has a different conception of what a natural state is, and ultimately, this leads to a different conception of what a government should be, based on this natural state. Aristotle’s feelings on the natural state of man is much different than that of modern philosophers and leads to a construction of government in and of itself; government for Hobbes and Locke is a departure from the natural state of man.
Human beings have been struggling to learn the meaning of life since the first day. Ideologies are born as human’s interpretation of the world and belief system, also an endeavor to seek the truth of human nature. Ideologies emerge throughout the periods of great changes: the Enlightenment, the English “Glorious” Revolution, the American Revolution, etc. They have become the motivations, the standards, and the roots to modern political systems. Their roots are the philosophies developed by famous philosophers throughout the time. However, as each ideology is developed, its own contradiction also grows, takes place in the realm of actions. This, in turn, shows contradiction as human nature.
Political Philosophy is typically a study of a wide range of topics such as, justice, liberty, equality, rights, law, politics and the application of a codified law. Depending on what the philosophy is, it usually tends to be a very sensitive and a personal ideology that an individual holds within the reality of their existence. Several of the fundamental topics of political philosophy shape up the society that we live in as these specific topics and their implementation by the state ensures a legitimate government. In Political Philosophy, the aforesaid concepts or topics are evaluated and analyzed with tremendous depth in context to their history and intent. Furthermore, in a rather colloquial sense, political philosophy is generally a point of view which after some deep thinking asks questions such as, what are the government’s duties? Is it legitimate? What makes it legitimate? What are the duties of its citizens? What are their rights? Are they protected? So on and so forth. In the following paper, I will canvass my political philosophy and elaborate on my reasoning behind it.
Human nature is not simply a measure of our human tendencies. It is both individual and collective. It does not explain why events happen. Instead, it explains the subconscious of each individual in the instant that events happen. The social order that best fits human nature is one where the informed opinions of everyone creates decisions and causes action. Madison’s argument for and against factions, Aristotle’s idea of ultimate happiness, and Locke’s concept of popular government and human rights all offer a significant component to the larger concept that is human nature. While some may argue that we will only fully understand human nature when we are met with death, still we can begin to capture a slight understanding to what governs human nature and the political order that helps it grow.
In both given articles, “The Roots of Muslim Rage” by Bernard Lewis, and “The Roots of Muslim Rage Revisited” by Nicolaas J.E. van der Zee, argue about the enhancement of the Muslim fundamentalism with different perspectives; however, I believe that Lewis’ view may be quiet misleading to the actual perception. Lewis indicates that Muslim fundamentalism is conceived through the Muslim community’s oppression and dissatisfaction with the West’s political involvement, as well as “Islam is a source of aggression” . In defiance of Lewis’ opinion, the word ‘Islam’ comes from the word peace as well as the will of submission to God. The notion of aggression and violence that Lewis conceptualizes to be the headline of Islam does not have any supporting
The argument referring to the nature of human beings and government is one that been debated for hundreds of years by many of the world’s greatest minds. John Locke and Thomas Hobbes are two opposing philosophers who have devoted many years to studying this subject. For Locke, the state of nature— the original condition of all humanity before civilization and order was established—is one where man is born free, equal and have rights that others should respect, such as the right to live and the right to liberty. For Hobbes, however, the state of nature is one of constant war; solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short ; it is, in Hobbes’ mind, civilization that separates humans from their primitive state. Hobbes believed that an individual’s only