Collectivism Is More Rational Than Belief

During the 6th to 2nd centuries BCE, several challenges contributed to philosophers and leaders revising existing belief systems and developing new ones. Some of the countries where these changes were evident are China, Greece, Egypt, and Mauryan India. As countries developed, differences between members of the same societies emerged and led to conflict and more diversity. Although several different challenges, such as religion, caused leaders to revise existing belief systems and create new ones, ultimately it was the challenges of new methods of education, various wars between countries, and the influence of different cultures that contributed to the new belief systems.

In source one, the writer evaluates how one must hold regard for others rights and freedoms and respect them and source three holds the opinion that collectivism on a small scale is acceptable but on a large scale it is dangerous. Both of these sources speak about how without collectivism, individualism can not prosper. Source two is different however, in that it shows a much more collectivist opinion. Although the views may not be in line with individuality, there are still some aspects of this ideology. If in an ant colony, One individual feels like they are more important than the others it will leave for chaos. However you also can not treat individuals as though they are nothing. You must be careful not to promote enough individualism so that the ideology spreads, but also be sure to provide enough so that each individual feels important. All three sources agree with the idea that collectivism and individualism are like ying and yang: Without one you can not have the

Meanwhile in collective societies they prioritise their decisions for good of the group above their own personal goals. In a business context collective societies will work better in groups with people they have a personal relationship with. While individualist societies can work well as individuals and in groups with people they do not know. This allows for quicker decision making but not knowing a colleague on a personal level may lead to less active participation. Collective mentality takes more time but more options are analysed in more depth which in some circumstances is more effective but less time efficient.

Collectivism not only negatively affects one’s identity, but also the imagination of each individual, in turn impeding the progress of society as a whole. When there is no motivation or passion, productivity suffers. People work the best when it is in their self interest, because humans are inherently selfish. “‘And if this should lighten the toil of men,’ said Similarity 5-0306, ‘then it is a great evil, for men have no cause to exist save in toiling for other men.’” When it comes to technology, the Council of Scholars give all kinds of excuses that are detrimental to their society. Even something as basic as a candle took fifty years to be approved. In capitalist society, men work and toil for themselves, not for others, which accounts for the rise of Western countries over communist countries with collectivist cultures. Collectivism causes creativity to be stifled, and prevents individuals from pursuing their passions to contribute their best to

But is individualism all good? According to Ayn Rand it is, but what about society in general? In an entirely individualistic society, there would be no welfare or social programs, leaving those on the bottom with no choice but to stay on the bottom. It would be a society without compassion for one another, with every person for him or herself. A society that runs solely on this ideal only works for the few who rise to the top, not the ninety-nine percent who helped them get there.

Collectivism is the practice or principle of giving a group priority over each individual (Merriam-Webster). Those who believe in collectivism think having society working towards the same goal or outcome is the most productive. Supporters of this theory feel it creates harmony and a sense of belonging (Andrews 1). Collective societies tend to be dependent on others in the group or institutions to meet their needs. Members of a collective society expect absolute loyalty to the group and have a “we” mentality (Andrews 1). As Ray Bradbury pointed out in Fahrenheit 451, when a collective society is present, “...they all say the same things and nobody says anything different from anyone else.” (31) The individual has no self-identity and is lost to the group. Although aspects of this argument are enticing, it ultimately fails to be a stronger argument because individual responsibility nor moral responsibility is present. There is no incentive for any individual to step up because everyone receives the same reward. Through collaboration and collective thoughts are great tools, we must remember that the original thought was generated by the individual and he or she should benefit from

Individualism and self-determination are against the needs of society for conformity and stability, because a society needs people that help out for it to function as a constant, strong society. People acting on their own will only bring down a society, because a society runs on its people contributing to it.

Each person works individually first, but as part of a larger group, each person must work as a team. Unfortunately, for society to work, each person must sacrifice some individuality. I would argue that each person in society is a puzzle piece. No puzzle piece is a perfect square, but they each have their place. Individual pieces fit to form a whole picture. Groups such as Anarchists are anti-society. They fight the government and “The Man” destroying property and causing mayhem. Yet without the government, without that high level of public cooperation, we wouldn’t have things such as roads or

     Sir Thomas More writes, in his book Utopia, about a society that is perfect in practically ever sense. The people all work an equal amount and everything they need for survival is provided. Most importantly is that everyone living in this perfect society is happy and content with their everyday lives. In this society everybody supports everyone. The community is only as strong as its weakest link. For society to progress everyone must work together. Opponents of the Utopian system, however, feel that the strong should not have to look after the weak. Progress would be maximized if all the resources are spent on the people most qualified to help society. A Utopian society, as perfect as the one

Collectivism¡¦s main argument is that society should not be controlled by people who are irresponsible. Hayek counters that point by stating that collectivism is nothing more than totalitarian in which individual freedoms are lost. He also states that the welfare and happiness of the society cannot be satisfied by a single plan (Hayek 63-64). This is especially true in countries that are very diverse in their people¡¦s education and culture. Collectivism also has the dilemma of ¡§who plans whom, who directs and

A social dilemma is when individuals choose actions that will affect others as well as themselves. The individual will aim to benefit themselves short term which generally results in a lower joint outcome. If the individuals acted collectively they would achieve a better optimal outcome than the one they would achieve on their own. These social dilemmas have been characterised in game theory by the prisoners dilemma. They will achieve the Nash equilibrium which is lower than the socially desirable outcome. This is the problem of collective action. This is not to say that forms of collective action cannot be seen in everyday world. Mobs, gangs, cartels, neighbourhood associations, charities and voting are all forms of collective action. (ostrom)

One of the facets of living within civilized society is that there are certain norms and social conventions that people must follow. Frequently, there is a large effort on the part of government, financial, and social institutions to keep people doing most of the same thing as others going to work, driving cars, buying homes, etc. Despite the fact that people engage in these efforts individually, the simple fact that they are all attempting to do the same thing, in much the same way, is indicative of the fact that they are engaged in collective behavior. THESIS: Those who are able to overcome collective behavior and allow for their individuality to determine their own outcomes exemplify the best of human nature.

“To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment.” Quoted from American author Ralph Waldo Emerson, this encapsulates the very spirit of a natural human. In our natural state, we humans strive to continue building on our foundation. The foundation is different for each and every one of us, meaning different things will be built upon each of our foundations. This is humanity, what separates us from the rest of the animal kingdom. We strive to not only survive, but to live. To experience life in our own individual perspective is what makes us unique. In a society discouraging individualism, humanity is stripped away and replaced with synthetic interaction. Simply put, collectivism strips life away. People will not conform to what others think they should conform to, unless it is

First, Individualism vs. Collectivism. Individualism is the social function of the relative likelihood of a free and individual means only take care of themselves and their families. By contrast, collectivism is the tendency of social functions relatively tight where each individual to identify themselves as a group with loyalty not need to be asked. The main problem of this dimension is the degree of interdependence of individuals in a

Before modern technology, men would band together for the protection of their families. History has proven people group together for survival, whether that be warmth, food, or protection. The idea was that a group is stronger and more profitable than one person acting alone. Each tribe or gathering of individuals working together is considered a society. A society is nothing more than a group of people living together for a common purpose, or simply because it is more convenient. But, if all societies were thriving entities, then we would not know the hardships that have repeated throughout history, such as, poverty and famine. On the contrary, a society that works well is a society that works for the well-being of its individual members. A high functioning and successful society is built on a foundation of trust and equality and enforced by a governing body.