Collectivism Is More Rational Than Belief

Decent Essays

I will be using rationality as the main criterion for evaluating which philosophy is preferable, so the resolution can basically be re-stated as "belief in collectivism is more rational than belief in individualism". My case revolves around 3 independently functioning reasons for why an affirmation of the resolution is more plausible than a negation of it. I. Collectivism increases the chances of individual success The logic underlying this is simple. A society, by definition, is a group of individuals. So when we "value the interests of society", we are really just valuing the interests of the largest possible number of individuals within that society-- we are valuing the interests of the majority. And since an individual is statistically more likely to part of the majority than the minority (duh), collectivism ensures that any given individual is more likely to have their interests protected than not. Thus, theoretically, collectivism increases the probability of individual prosperity. However, this is not only demonstrable in theory; we can see empirical examples of this holding true in practice as well. Just take a look at nature -- we can easily observe a large variety of species that instinctively live in large, interactive groups in which collective welfare is valued over individual welfare -- wolves, elephants, lions, chimpanzees, meerkats, bison, sheep, antelopes, ants, bees, ducks, small fish, and many more fall into this category. There is a reason why such a

Get Access