Free

Freedom of speech Essay Freedom of speech and the liberty to uphold oneÂ’s expression has long been the subject of many debates. It has taken centuries if not years for mankind to come to a point where many can easily voice their opinions without having to ponder over the consequences. But one should always know where to draw the line. Freedom of expression also needs to have its limits. Two of the masterminds who put forth their work on liberty and freedom of speech were John Stuart Mill and Jean-Jacque Rousseau. The concepts penned by Rousseau contradict those that were constructed by Mil; while the former focused on the functioning of the society as a whole, the latter advocated the rights of the individual to his freedom. Mill basically argument in his piece ‘On LibertyÂ’ allows for Utilitarian approach. His main idea was to give society and human nature a complete independence to mature and expand in infinite ways and direction. The main idea revolved around the kind of power that can be placed upon the individual by the society, and how that power was wrong unless exercised in self-defense. In particular, minorities were often the ones being oppressed. Mill pointed out that this tyrannical behavior was being supported by the major thinkers of that day. Public opinion followed the opinion of these thinkers and hence ended up doing the same. ‘On LibertyÂ’ sought to diminish the power the society had over an individualÂ’s freedom by giving that individual the freedom of speech. It was identified through the works that most people had precedent and preference which further provoked dissent and thus pressurized people. Mill also noted that there was no way of judging people on their inte rference into another personÂ’s private affairs. MillÂ’s idea of complete and total independence from society is contradicted in RousseauÂ’s works ‘The Social Contract,Â’ according to which man was restricted by the state and society that he existed in, once he became a part of the land he gave up the right to himself; society had a right upon the individual which he agrees to when he chooses to exist within a given society. This, he believed, was done for the greater good of the entire society; thereby his main focus was the society and not the individual, unlike Mill. For Rousseau, society itself was like a collective individual and that collective entity was sovereign and not a singular entity. He  allowed for individuals having their own aims and goals, but asserted that the will of the collective paved way for the greater good. By this definition he gives the society the power to act for the greater good and confirms that authority as absolute. He even goes as far as to recommend the death penalty for anyone who goes against this norm. Their ideas give us two different facets of life. Should one speak oneÂ’s mind or work for the greater good of the society?Mill believed in supporting diversity while condemning conformity by rejecting any form of manipulation that could be applied to a personÂ’s opinion or behavior. It was the revolutionary authorÂ’s belief that liberty forms the basis of much of the social progress that takes place. Through ‘On Liberty,Â’ it is asserted that freedom of speech is important primarily because to begin with, the opinion which most find disdainful maybe the correct one. Secondly, even if one voices a direly disproportionate view, refuting it will only help strengthen the general understanding of the topic amongst the masses. It was MillÂ’s belief that by continuously voicing thoughts, ideas and questions people kept society moving and defied stagnation. ‘The Social Contract,Â’ on the other hand goes onto state that the authority the ruler has over the state is like that of the father over his child. There is literally absolute control. Through RousseauÂ’s argument we are told that the mighty are the fittest to lead and decide what is best for the entire society. The wellbeing of the society depends on it functioning as one body, mind and soul. Each individual is part of the grand scheme which is built around the orders of the sovereign i.e. the rulers of the state. Mill charted three categories of freedom and asserted that the society was to abide by all three, if it were a free society. The first was freedom of thought and opinion, the second being the right to plan oneÂ’s life and future and the third to associate with other individuals on mutual grounds. The main idea behind this was that one should be able to pursue their own whims without hurting others in the process. Rousseau also has three implications of the contract. The first one being the fact that the conditions of the contract are same for everyone which is why everyone will collectively make it easier for everyone else to follow, secondly an individual cannot stand against the authority because he has given up that  right because he is a part of the state, and lastly, there is completely equality ergo the natural freedom that people enjoy stays intact, regardless of the social contract. It was in the ‘Discourse of InequalityÂ’ that Rousseau observed of inequality that the powerful has the choice between giving the masses an equal piece of the pie or letting the masses rot while they took everything for themselves. He was not an advocate of the powerful; he merely illustrated how the meek must always follow them because they have no other choice. The problem with RousseauÂ’s approach is that it completely rejects the claim that minorities or small groups may have on the society. If the masses chose to, they can quite literally annihilate any small sects that they wish without as much as a blink of an eye. In this regard, we are forced to side with MillÂ’s argument. However, ‘On LibertyÂ’ has its own faults because it focuses too much on the individualÂ’s needs without paying much heed to the society. Mill believed that the only instance where any one person or the society itself was justified in interfering with someoneÂ’s freedom was for their own self-preservation. In this way MillÂ’s only restriction on liberty was when it ended up harming other people, for which he advocated restraint. He was against the idea that meddling in someoneÂ’s affair. Diversity was not something to be toyed with, but the right to liberty was to be treated with respect. One has to also note that much of MillÂ’s work is at times vague on the limitations that can be placed on an individual. Another weak point is his extreme emphasis on the individual and not creating a balance between the individual and the society. While the individual was required to support the society he/she lived in, that by no means gave society any right to probe into their matters. As stated in the ‘Discourse of Inequality,Â’ “The difference between good and bad men is determined by public esteemÂ… The rank of citizens ought, therefore, to be regulated, not according to their personal merit Ââ€" for this would put it in the power of the magistrate to apply the law almost arbitrarily,” this shows that he believed that individuality would only hinder the laws that had been catered to the society as a whole. If each person was to be accounted for then the whole as Rousseau saw it, would come to a halt. Both authors present two extreme ways of life. while one advocates complete and total freedom, albeit not at the expense of others, the other goes on to suggest that freedom is restricted only is what the choices someone more powerful has selected for the majority. For freedom of speech both arguments do not fit. There needs to be a balance between the two. One cannot allow complete and total freedom of speech because inadvertently, whether it was intended or not, an individual may end up harming the society he/she lives in. If everyone began to voice a million different point of views at the same time there wouldnÂ’t be diversity, there would be chaos. Similarly, if the entire society was to follow the whims of a few men and women then society will not be able to move on. New ideas would never develop; people would never gain knowledge because knowledge would itself become restricted. Someone needs to stop talking to allow for the silence that precedes anotherÂ’s idea. History shows us that without speaking oneÂ’s mind, no real revolutions would have taken place, that being said, history also shows us how massive panic can sweep nations because of the freedom of speech that was given to the people. A balance between the two is needed. Social responsibility needs to be practiced with the freedom of speech; the two should be taken as a packaged deal and not separately. Works Cited Rousseaus Social ContractRousseaus Discourse on InequalityMills On Liberty

Artificial Tanning Essay -- Skin Cancer Culture Papers

Artificial Tanning Jim Rice loved the way tanning made him look and feel, that is, until he became personally affected by the dangers that came with the frivolous glitz and glamour of a nice tan. Artificial tanning has become a sub-culture for youths across the nation. Those who do not go tanning are a minority and those who do tan ignore the health risks posted in every tanning booth and bed in the state of Massachusetts. However, for Jim Rice, a middler chemical engineering major at Northeastern University, the health risks of tanning transformed into a frightening reality. "Recreational tanning was always the hip thing to do back in high school," said Rice. "But when I started to notice skin discoloration on my lower hip during my senior year of high school it wasn't so hip anymore." When doctors told Rice that he had pre-cancerous cells in existing moles he didn't think much of it. He figured that he would have the moles removed and his worries would be over. "I got the most perplexed when my dermatologist told me to stay out of the sun and wear sunscreen at all times," said Rice. It was as if being tan was more of a priority than his health. Following his initial surgery, Rice had to pay a trip to his skin doctor every six months. Upon his first visit back to the doctor, Rice was diagnosed with two cancerous growths - one pre-cancerous and one cancerous. Another surgery would have to take place immediately. Suddenly, Rice looked back on his frequent tanning salon habits and his "darkness" competitions with fellow lifeguards over the summers in utter regret. Rice has had seven surgeries since. He had plastic surgery to help reduce the scarring on his body. His doctors placed him on an extremely high risk f... ... admits that she is impatient and would rather get spray-tanned in 30 seconds over sweating in a tanning bed for twelve minutes. There are no proven health risks of spray tanning as of right now; however the FDA is investigating the safety of the DHA component in the "Mystic Tan". "Everyone should be aware that what happened to me could very possibly happen to anyone," said Rice. "The risks that come along with tanning are not far from a reality, even if they sneak up on people ten or twenty years down the road." Rice understands that tanning provides an ultimate self-esteem boost. Although Rice wishes that he could get his tan back, he realizes that tanning is only a temporary satisfaction. He has learned this the hard way. "People really need to weigh out how important tanning is to them and if they are prepared to deal to the consequences," said Rice.

Relationship Issue

Conflicts between people who express outlooks of different epochs often happen in the society and there are lots of situations when even members of the same family who are supposed to be the closest with each other, support opposite visions of the world. However, misunderstanding can always be overcome and warm relations achieved as long as people put efforts into that. Flannery O’Connor’s book ‘Everything that Rises Must Converge’ deals with the relationship of a mother and her son and represents contradictions between them which arise from their different outlooks on reality in which they are living and shows how they are unable to overcome them. Julian is a recent college graduate who lives with his solicitous widowed mother who has put her whole life to raise him well and give him good education. The conflict of Julian with his mother starts because she has a vision of life which is completely different from his. Julian’s mother ‘‘†¦lived according to the laws of her own fantasy world outside of which he had never seen her set foot. ’’ She built that little world for herself, not realizing that times have changed and she needed to adjust to them. She couldn’t keep living in her little world forever and some time crisis was going to occur. Every time Julian made some remark about their present life and that it was different from what his mother had before, she only started remembering past times and past wealthy life which she used to have: â€Å"Your great-grandfather was a former governor of this state†¦ Your grandfather was a prosperous land-owner. Your grandmother was a Godhigh. † However, it’s impossible to blame her for that- she cannot change, those ideas are too firmly fixed in her mind and Julian should have accepted them but he doesn’t even try to that. No matter how much Julian tries to convince her that reality is completely different from those memories, she never wants to listen to him. However, instead of treating his mother with respect and letting her have some weaknesses like any other person, he gets mad at her all the time. Everything what his mother says agitates Julian and he is unable to talk to his mother without a feeling of frustration. Even though he takes her to a reducing class and listens to everything what she says, the feeling of irritation doesn’t leave him and he never feels at peace. His rude attitude towards everything what his mother says shows in most of the discussions in the novel. â€Å"Will you look around you,† he said tensely, â€Å"and see where you are now? † and he swept his arm jerkily out to indicate the neighborhood, which the growing darkness at least made less dingy. ’ Julian is mad at almost everything what his mother says. It becomes clear that as long as Julian and his mother have different views on things, they will never be able to communicate peacefully and they will always have arguments. What really saves them from stopping communication at all, is calmness of Julian’s mother and her trying to neglect unkind words which her son s ays. Even though they express different outlooks and despite any bad features she has, she does show concern about her son and she sincerely hopes for his happy future. Julian’s mother is certainly naive in that because there is hardly any future ahead of Julian but she believes in that like a child and she made sacrifices for him: â€Å"The law of [her life] was to sacrifice herself for him after she had first created the necessity to do so by making a mess of things†¦ All of her life had been a struggle to act like a Chestny and to give him everything she thought a Chestny ought to have without the goods a Chestny ought to have†¦Ã¢â‚¬  One of the main points on which Julian and his mother contradict are issues of racism. In Julian’s point of view, black people have a right to do everything just like white people. However, his mother doesn’t share his point of view because she was brought up in a different society and believes they are inferior. This is again the sign of her living in the past when she had a black nurse and whom she loved but considered her much lower than herself. This attitude can be best seen in the episode when Julian and his mother get on the bus. The bus is half-filled and when mother looks around, she sees only white people and becomes happy. She even says to the lady sitting next to her: â€Å"I see we have the bus to ourselves†. Julian couldn’t stand it when his mother said that and again felt shame for her words. She does her best to show her bad attitude towards black people and doesn’t consider them to be her equal. When a black man comes into the bus and another lady changes her seat to get away from him, Julian’s mother approves of that and thinks this is the way it should be done. The attitude of his mother makes Julian get thoughts of punishing her which show to us that he extremely cruel because a son cannot treat his mother like that. Julian thought â€Å"†¦he might make friends with some distinguished Negro professor or lawyer and bring him home to spend the evening† in order to make his mother feel miserable. He points to his mother that a black lady sitting in the bus has the same hat as she does and wants to make a point that black people can do everything just like white people, they are people of the same kind- but his mother doesn’t understand that. However, the worst lesson which she gets is when she wants to give a coin to the little black boy and suffers from that because the boy â€Å"†¦don't take nobody’s pennies! † and this painful moment leads to the end of the novel. In my opinion, it was possible for Julian and his mother to find ways to understand each other if the son at least put some efforts into that. Despite of all his mother’s faults, Julian should have been more patient with her and he realizes that in the end of the novel when he understands he has lost her. He is not a saint himself and since every human has weaknesses, he should have been more loving and kind with his mother because she gave birth to him and sacrificed many things for him. When he understands he remained alone, he realizes the whole horror of his situation- that he is completely lost in the world without his mother but there is nothing what he can change about that anymore, so the extent of his self-deception is fully confirmed.

The Dynamics Of Political Correctness Essay - 1694 Words

Correctly Political: A Look into the Dynamics of Political Correctness nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;Every American probably knows what it means to be politically correct. After all, we hear about it on the news almost every night. We have to be constantly aware of whether or not something we say or do is going to offend someone. This mode of communication is present in every aspect of our lives, from the most formal to the most informal situations. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;This paper will answer questions on the origin of the term ‘politically correct and the applications of the communication pattern it refers to: who started it, who is doing it, and why. Is political correctness a good idea? Is it too pervasive?†¦show more content†¦It evolved into a term of disapproval among leftists for those whose line-toeing fervor was too much to bear. (Richer and Weir 53) Thus, the expression went from having a positive meaning to having a negative meaning. nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;What we think of today as political correctness (PC) began in a recognizable form during the social movements of the late 1960s. PC was used as a self critique by social movements, each saw itself as politically/ethically correct. PC referred to the culture or practices of the womens movement or gay liberation or a Marxist party, but not to a common culture cross-cutting these movements. There existed a shifting line of conflict between movements, and groups could signify affinity or hostility with another group by proclaiming these movements politically correct. (Richer and Weir 53) Paul Berman, a well- known essayist, has a very interesting view of the social movement culture of the 1960s: nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;nbsp;â€Å"The left wing uprising of circa 1968 had two phases, which were in perfect discord. The first phase was an uprising on behalf of the ideals of liberal humanism -- an uprising on behalf of the freedom of the individual against a soulless system. The second phase was the opposite, at least philosophically. It was a revolt against liberal humanism. Is said, in effect: Liberal humanismShow MoreRelatedThe Importance Of Politically Correct981 Words   |  4 PagesO’Neill refers to the â€Å"euphemism treadmill† as â€Å"the word-replacement strategy that the advocates of political correctness pursue which does not resolve itself in a single iteration or, indeed in any number of iterations.† (O’Neill 282) After the new creation of the politically correct term for mental retardation does not change the negative connotations associated with the word or the social dynamics that pertain to the subject, the term enters common circulation and society uses it in the same wayRead MoreThe Cost of Protecting Our Borders1382 Words   |  6 Pagesnational problem that is costing United States citizens billions each year. â€Å"Political Correctness† forbid certain politicians from calling illegal immigrants what they are at face value: Criminals. They commit an illegal act that undermines the economic back bone of our country and not one administration has wanted to tackle the problem head on. Why is that? Is it political correctness that stands in the way? Or is it political posturing, budget constraints or all three? And what is the true cost ofRead MoreAnalysis Of The Article Harrison Bergeron 983 Words   |  4 Pagesat the Even the striving for equality by means of a directed economy can result only in an officially enforced inequality - an authoritarian determination of the status of each individual in the new hierarchical order. The characters have a dynamic style of acting. Harrison Bergeron was able to exhibit all the required roles in the story. Harrison s actions suggest that power does indeed corrupt, or at least, ability does. The story is set in the United States April of 2081, a gloomyRead MoreThe Battle Of The Confederate Flag1719 Words   |  7 Pagesused to benefit these student-athletes, illustrates how capitalism creates exploitation. According to Young, the capitalistic dynamics between owners and laborers, or university administrators and student-athletes, produces a transfer of power whereby laborers are at the mercy of the owners. Young posits that justice would demand dismantling the system that creates this dynamic thereby giving creating a system of shared power between owner and laborer. In 2003, after many years of debate and protestsRead MoreMy Youth Of The Election Of Barack Obama Essay1674 Words   |  7 Pagesincredible significance. Unfortunately, my first memorable political event has left me with a cynical impression of politics. The impending nomination of Donald Trump has left me baffled and in disbelief. It is hard for me to understand how Donald Trump supporters can reconcile his statements with their own party principles. Beginning with the statements made by Donald Trump regarding Mexican immigrants, this race has been nothing short of a dynamic spectacle. In June 2015, shortly after announcing hisRead MoreThe Movie Hell Or High Water Essay1488 Words   |  6 Pagesconfronts racist discourse on that discourse’s favored ground. It easily slides into moralism and thus into fruitless debates about the relative virtues of fictive characters and the correctness of their fictional action (Shohot 810).† This oversimplification of culture via stereotypes leads to the presentation of complex political issues as issues of character within minorities. This simplified view becomes the dominant view as it is portrayed again and again on screen. An example of this oversimplificationRead MoreThe World A Global Village1644 Words   |  7 Pages Society is not static. There exist numerous changes that take place on an everyday basis, which affect organizations, relationships, culture and other dynamics of human nature. In fact, different changes have different effects on people, but the fact remains that society is a changing structure. Historians and sociologists have attempted to account for the changes that have taken place and are still taking place at rapid rates (Duranti, 45). The lack of a fixed process in society has forced anthropologistsRead MoreEssay on Why Religion Is Important1017 Words   |  5 Pagessmall-scale societies. An exploration of Christianity, Judaism, Islam, or any other major religion is beyond the scope of this essay. The approach taken is that of cultural relativity--religious practices or beliefs are not evaluated in terms of their correctness or sophistication but, rather, in terms of their function within the societies that have them. What is Religion? A religion is a system of beliefs usually involving the worship of supernatural forces or beings. Religious beliefs provideRead MoreFeldman: Businesses as Social Agents742 Words   |  3 Pageslimited too. Once, Feldman (2012) descries that ethics, codes of conduct and mission and vision of companies were the golden rule - now, as long as the bare minimum is met, social responsibility is practiced in ways that allow for legal and political correctness only. Thus, reflecting on Whiteheads statement - What is morality in any given time and place? It is what the majority then and there happen to like and immorality is what they dislike, it is possible to argue that the manner of businessRead MoreSports Coverage And Its Effect On Women s Sports863 Words   |  4 Pagesfollowings. The idea that men’s sports should have more viewers and females serve as a â€Å"sexualized comic relief† is a product of a deep rooted gender binary, and societal gender roles that skew our perceptions of female athletes. Disregarding political correctness, there is no doubt that the athletic achievements of men generally surpass that of their female counterparts, yet that is not the main reason that women’s sports are so overlooked. The absence of females in sports media is a social construct