He also believed that the most important characteristic of our personalities is created by how we treat others. While Chuang Tzu preached that things are categorized as good or evil. Everything is everything, and we make our own opinions on the level of goodness or the amount of evil. Chuang Tzu is also a complete anarchist. He believed that the world “does not need governing; in fact it should not be governed.” He also proclaimed that good order results spontaneously when things are let alone.
Comparative Analysis Confucianism and Legalism are two systems of society in which things are gone about in different ways. Confucianism is the complex system of moral, social, political, and religious teachings that aim to create a man of learning and of good manners. Legalism was a system that was set up to make model people behave and act how the dynasty wanted. Laws that were supported by Legalists were meant to support the state, the emperor, and his military. Legalists believed that if the punishment was heavy and the law against their actions were strict, neither the powerful nor the weak would be able to escape the consequences.
Kant’s view uses a categorical imperative, in which ethics is based upon an absolute, objective, deontologcial theory, in which intentions are more important than consequences. Kant believed that an ethics should be based around something entirely good. He decided that the only thing entirely good in the whole universe is ‘good will’. Everybody must decide ethical decisions in a way in which they put themselves last, fulfill their duty, and commit only selfless acts. This may be psychologically impossible, as many believe there is always a selfish reason for any good deed, however Kant only proposed a theory, and
In his text, Lao-Tzu considered that a good leader is the one who governs his people with moderation for the best result. On the contrary, Machiavelli advocated the necessity for a successful leader to take control over of his people by force. Personally, I believe that a combination of their two perspectives will actually create an ideal leader in today’s world. According to Lao-Tzu, war is not necessary. He preferred a small scale of military.
We face a problem of full accountability, many owners purchase weapons without thought of receiving training for or how to secure the weapon. It is proven that “cultural orientations condition individuals’ beliefs about risk through culturally partisan forms of trust” and that “The people they trust, naturally enough, tend to be the ones who share their worldviews” (Braman and Kahan 576). Gun owners and gun controllers continually profess to the need/no need of the weapons with the many excuses but when paired down to the most basic reasoning it is “that insufficient gun control will expose to many innocent persons to deliberate of accidental shootings; and that the excessive gun control will render too many law-abiding citizens vulnerable to the violent predations” (Braman and Kahan 577). The opposition to legalized gun owner ship responds to the claims of need with their own reasoning to remove all weapons with the exceptions of government officials by reiterating with the statement that “the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution is targeted towards
Like genocide, terrorism has been used in warfare since warfare was first instituted. As the name states it is used to create a state of terror in the society that it is used against. This tactic is not only used against military targets, but also against civilian targets, in order to pressure the public against any retribution towards the group. Terrorism is very efficient and cost effective, as has been seen in recent years. As with genocide, terrorism does not create any moral dilemma to the society that implements it, yet the one that it is being used against is of the opinion that it is one of the worst things that can be used.
Knoblauch admits that literacy is a necessary aspect to modern society, but warns the reader how educators and other citizens must be aware of the power literacy holds and not to be “blinded by the the light of their own benevolence”, (Knoblauch 452). Tannen also believes that power lies in the educational system itself, but focuses on the style of learning being taught to the students. Tannen discusses the style of education that teaches students that power lies in debate and arguments. For example, “”students are taught that they must disprove others’ arguments in order to be original, make a contribution, and demonstrate their intellectual ability”, (Tannen 546). Unlike Knoblauch and Tannen, Barber believes that the power of education does not lie inside the educational system itself, but by the society
While I understand the views of both men, I believe that Machiavelli’s perspective is more prevalent and useful in the world today. Machiavelli rights that a leader needs to show his prowess and confidence in his decisions which helps make people want to follow the leader. He writes with a more realistic but cynical point of view. Lao Tzu writes from the side that all humans are inherently good. Lao Tzu trusts all people to do the right thing and says not to force any expectations into people as that will cause them only to backlash.
Education according to Althusser reproduces inequality by preparing pupils for work in the wider society. School contribute to training pupils so they learn the rules and procedures of the workplace, and it helps to prepare us to accept the bourgeoisie’s ideologies. The process in which we learn to accept inequality is made up of two elements: the repressive state apparatuses which maintain the rules of the bourgeoisie through fear and force. The police, courts and the army are good examples of services within society that help keep them in power and separate them from the proletariats. Another service is called the ideological state apparatuses which maintain the same role, only they are responsible for controlling individual’s ideologies which include religion, media and the education system.
How is Law Classified Introduction “The history of law is the history of civilization, and law itself is only the blessed tie that binds human society together. …Our long armed and hairy ancestors had no idea of redress beyond vengeance, or of justice beyond mere individual reprisal. The law, like everything we do and like everything we say, is a heritage from the past.” Thomas Hobbs’s portrayal of mankind seems to eliminate one of the substantial distinctions between man and other animals. The description of “long armed and hairy ancestors” fits perfectly with this belief and in fact Thomas Hobbs stated that “man in his natural state, is a vile beast that needs to be restrained by laws.” This is to say that without rules and laws governing his manners, man would naturally practise much more primitive behaviour. Thus in its most empirical form, law is a tool which civilisation has learnt to use throughout the ages in order to control certain natural human behaviour which might threaten, harm or otherwise endanger the safety and welfare of civil society.