When crafting a political philosophy, a special attention must be payed to the values which define it. Without a strong foundation of what is important, it’s impossible to make arguments about what outcomes are good, and thus what paths to use to get there. For Robert Nozick, that defining value is personal freedom. While Nozick’s vision of a society based around protecting each individual’s freedom and right to self-ownership seems enticing, it would actually lead to the exact kind of captive life that he seeks to avoid. Governments are not the only bodies that can infringe on the rights of others. Even with regulations in place to prevent active infringement on the rights of others, there are avenues for those with more resources to exert …show more content…
Not allowing someone to do what they want simply because you think they would be worse off for it is a mindset with which real freedom cannot coexist. Just as it’s a fundamental right to be able to use your resources to better yourself, it is also necessary to give people the freedom to take actions that diminish their resources, and potentially their opportunities. If another body can take control of your freedom to make decisions with regards to the kind of future for yourself that your life should lead to, then you don’t have any self-determinative rights at all. Almost every action can be shown to have some effect on your future economic prospects, so any system that seeks to control the outcomes of people’s different actions would necessarily have full control of your life. At that point, the freedom that the system was attempting to spread is essentially …show more content…
Humans are imperfect, and we make imperfect decisions. Even any redistribution would, and historically has, imperfectly address any inequality it attempted to end. And these imperfect results would also necessarily compromise freedom. But I don’t think those are good enough reason to wholly abandon the goal of having an appropriate balance. The loss in freedom of a billionaire paying a million dollars in taxes is magnitudes less than the freedom lost when a single parent has to start working a second job to pay for an emergency medical procedure for their child.
The reason the government took away free will of its people and placed them into social classes according to their jobs was to create peace by treating everyone equally so that the word does not go into ruin like how it did during the unmentionable times but what the government does not realize is that according to Ayn Rand’s opinion, the more the individuality is taken away, the more the possibilities of rebellion awaken within people because it is not human nature to be given a role and expect it to be followed without
Taking on Zozick’s construction of entitlement theory begs for a definition of justice, and it’s importance in this philosophical narrative. One’s liberty, that is one’s ability to do as he pleases without the persuasion or constraint of another, is the root of self-ownership (individual rights). Self-ownership also means one’s ownership over th...
People should benefit from freedom, equality and justice. Absolute freedom is sometimes very dangerous and may destroy the basic principles of the society. A lot of people believe that freedom means doing whatever you want, whenever you want.
Loss of Freedom in The Giver The Giver, a book written by Lois Lowry, questioned my ideas, thoughts and beliefs. The novel describes an ideal society, in which everything is supposed to be perfect, with all life’s problems solved. It is all about being happy with what the people have and not questioning their lifestyles because they did not know the difference between good and bad. The people are denied of their preferable way of life without their knowledge of how the real world is supposed to be. In the I can. However, the citizens of this society are not able to control their life; for example their choice of clothing, choice of loving and having feelings, or choice of family members. From all existing creatures, we humans differ because we are able to use our brain to make decisions. In the novel, the people of the given society have authority figures that show them how to live their life. “Katya, became a Nine and removed her hair ribbons and got her bicycle” (P The rules start with small things like what age one starts to ride a bike, which age group wears certain types of jackets, the clothing one wears each day, and even what to eat. In the real world, we humans make similar decisions for ourselves without thinking about it. People need guidance in their life to the right way of living but not a book of instructions. Many of us live each day dreaming of our future family and all the happiness we may get from that. I cannot imagine how it feels not to have freedom to feel and love. “Jonas, she said with a smile, the feeling you described as wanting? It was your the opposite sex. Beginning from early age, children are controlled not to feel or appreciate his/her opposite sex. The adults are made to take the pills to annihilate their sexual desires. When the children grow up and become adults, more decisions are made for them. When one is old enough to get married, the superior power chooses a mate for the person and is wedded. This is when I question the meaning of marriage. a future together, not a partnership that you deal with like a business. Although many cultures have different say in this sacred ceremony, most have similar ideas. To many people, love is affection based on admiration or common interests and warm attachment, enthusiasm or devotion. How can one live happy in life without the experience of such feelings? These individuals in the novel did not know better, if they knew how good it is to feel love or even know a good taste when it is good, then they would not be happy with the way of life in their community. “J What if they were allowed to choose their own mate?
John Mill’s On Liberty seeks to expound on how individuals and the society can exist as liberal entities without infringing on each other’s rights. Liberty is the condition of being free within the society, that is free from any form of restriction inflicted by authority. He argues that individual freedom is the basis of democracy where people exercise their own free will (Mill 2005). He also rejects the idea of social contract where individuals comply with society for them to gain social benefit (Mill 2005). It is generally thought that social development can only occur if certain constraints are placed on individual liberty. But the contrary is also true, if restriction are placed on people’s freedom, it becomes difficult for them to thrive
There are many people that think there is economic and wealth equality in the United States , but with all the statistics I provided it can be clearly seen that inequality in America is a serious issue , and it's getting worse with every year. I do believe that there should be some income inequality because that drives people to succeed , but I also believe that too much inequality limits a lot of people from achieving financial success.
...ess should only be limited by that of the choices that the individual makes and the opportunities that said individual may or may not take advantage of, not by the choices and opportunities that others may or may not make for them. In these aspects of equality and self-reliance, it is my belief that only government is powerful enough to ensure or attempt to ensure this pursuit.
The current tax system that the United States uses contains several flaws. First of all, it is very complex. It is comprised of many various variables that can create loopholes. These loopholes can cause two equal income families to be paying very different tax rates. In fact, there are 480 different types of tax forms (Website). The current tax system is also very unfair for the wealthy. Because it is a progressive tax, it is higher for people who have higher incomes. People should not be punished for being successful. If a flat tax policy were instituted, then it would simplify the complicated tax system, create fairness within the economy, and promote a desire to thrive financially.
American freedom has faced many tribulations, especially throughout the slavery, segregation, and women’s suffrage eras. However, the ideological belief of individual freedom has always triumphed. From when the first Pilgrim stepped onto American soil to the present day America has been run by a democracy and the freedom that system of government allows its peoples to have. “Americans share a common identity grounded in the freedom — consistent always with respecting the freedom of others — to live as they choose” (Friedman).
It is a little-known fact that for the past century, every American president has been given a copy of John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty[1] upon entering office. Since its publication in 1859, On Liberty’s discussions of liberty and individuality have been a foundation for modern Western political thought and for the liberal democracy. Mill brings to light a unique perspective on the relationship between liberty and individuality, and in the end, on tolerance. According to Mill, individual liberty should be limited by one, and only one thing: the self-preservation of society and other individuals. To that end, man should be free to act and even more so to think in any form he wishes, without the suppression of ideas or opinions, as long as it does not prevent others from doing the same. This liberty will diversify society and allow individuality to flourish. For Mill, liberty—based on a recognition of man’s fallibility and right to self-preservation—breeds individuality, which in turn leads to the betterment of individual character and of society as a whole.
Robert Nozick designed the “experience machine” as a thought experiment to analyze what matters to people other than our experiences and the feelings we attain from them. The “experience machine” is a machine that is expertly designed to preprogram lifes’ experiences including the lives of others and is able to give you any experience you desire. The machine provides a large selection of experiences from which one can select life experiences for a selected period of time; after such you will have a selected period of time out of the machine to reselect another set of life experiences and return back to the machine. Nozick’s thought experiment includes everyone in the population as servicing the machine is not required and one does not know if they are inside. The thought experiment explores what truly matters to us apart from our experiences or the temporary moments of bliss we arrive at.
If we start letting simple freedoms go, we could lose some major ones. Works Cited Huxley, Aldous. A. & Co. Brave New World. New York: Harper Perennial Modern Classics, 2006.
Nozick agrees with the liberty principle proposed by Rawls, but he disagrees with the equality principle and the fashion in which resources are distributed. I believe the historical principle of distribution is one strength of Nozick’s ideas. The historical principle of distribution states that the justice of any distribution does not depend on how closely it resembles any form of an equality pattern but how the distribution came about (959). I also agree with the theory that people are entitled to anything they acquired voluntarily and anything that is transferred to them voluntarily (958). Nozick does not agree with redistribution of wealth because taking resources from one person to benefit others is not necessarily voluntary. The biggest weaknesses of Nozick’s idea of equality comes from the idea that taxation and federally funded programs would be unjust forcing everything to be owned privately. This creates the most issues because people are self-interested and the virtue of market may not create the balance which Nozick proposed. Public school systems and public roads being deemed illegitimate would create issues with access. Also, making taxation illegal would make it difficult to have services like a police force, fire department, court system, or penal system because they would have to be paid by the individual directly. The police and court systems could become corrupt
Tom Paine described the state as a “necessary evil”. It is necessary in that it establishes order and security and ensures that contracts are carried out. Yet, it is “evil” since it enforces collective will upon society, thus constraining individual freedom. Negative freedom also supports economic freedom.
The term ‘Personal freedom’ connotes absence of an external agent who exercises control over our actions. In its literal sense it means absence of constraint. It includes freedom to form an assembly, of speech and expression, of movement, of residence etc. However, the gamut of personal freedom is limited; it can be enjoyed only to a certain extent as long as it doesn’t infringe the rights of others. If no constraint in exercise of personal freedom is observed, then there will be no guarantee that anyone would be able to enjoy these rights.