How Does Nagel Makes A Lot Of Great Points On The Society

Thomas Nagel states that human beings have a “natural expression” for the sense that life is absurd (Nagel 29). In his essay, simply titled “The Absurd”, Nagel argues that this natural presumption is true, but not for the reasons commonly given: the smallness and brevity of our lives. Instead, our lives are absurd because they feature an inevitable conflict between our feeling that life lacks justification and our inability to disengage with life despite this feeling. I argue that Nagel mistakenly includes awareness in his philosophical definition of absurdity. Nonetheless, his essay is an insightful read about the nature of human life.

Sandel account these examples as economic inequality where “in a society where everything is for sale, life is harder for modest means.” The market is not equal because society do not have equal amount of wealth. Economists would dismiss such idea, saying the free market revolve around demand and supply, and willingness to buy or sell goods and services. However, Sandel thinks those who willing to pay extra for goods and services always won. Based on above example, those who have the money will certainly be better off whereas those who cannot afford have no choice, but to be content. Thus, this creates an unequal distribution of wealth in the society.

Individuals have the ability to improve their economic and social status if they so choose. It is not our society that is at fault. Society may play a larger role in certain groups and situations, but it is still the responsibility of the individual to want to succeed in life. Society does not dictate that an individual must be poor; however it is their actions that dictate how much they succeed in life. The only true influences on an individual are that of legal and social norms which could affect the decisions one would make. In the end, I firmly feel it is still the decisions of the individual that places them in the socioeconomic status they are forced to

In the study Lareau conducted, it can be see that working class and poor families differ slightly in that being poor means less resources and a means of a greater struggle for the child. The similarities found explain why being lower class has it benefits in some areas then if you were middle or upper class. Now Lareau is not telling people to raise their children one way or that being rich is better because even the rich have many disadvantages their children encounter. Lareau emphasizes, “Overall, daily life for working-class and poor children is slower paced, less pressured, and less structured than for their middle- and

This article says, “Too many of America’s most disadvantaged children grow up without the skills needed to thrive in the twenty-first century. Whether in educational attainment between income groups or racial/ethnic groups or across geographic locations—inequality persists.” This creates long-term problems within that community. Meaning people who start out with disadvantages, usually don’t have the skills that the upper class more privileged kids do which help them eventually get jobs and maintain this middle to upper class community. The disadvantages people receive bad jobs and

Social inequality stems from many facets of life and mindsets reproduced continuously in America. The main backbone of systematic inequality is formed off of race, gender and class, which all contain crucial aspects that further oppress those subjected to inequality in various aspects of life. The resources-schools, occupations, invested parents- around one fuels the opportunity in their lives, a concept highlighted by Malcom Gladwell, in his book, Outliers. Situations one are brought up in or uncontrollable genetic aspects can very easily restrain their opportunities. Racial discrimination, gender roles and inferiority and the lack of fluidity in the low and working class push inequality, which simultaneously influencing the rich and privileged.

Continuing with the idea of people believing that it is unfair how the upper class has more advantages in life, this bring us to the “meritocratic model” which is the model that “recognizes inequities and tries to correct for socioeconomic disadvantages” says Arora (Arora 87). This is the system that is related with the United States (Arora 87) and the reason that most people believe that this model is fair is because people with low incomes or with fewer benefits are offered programs such as the Headstart program and subsidized healthcare. Doing this would help out the needy and put everyone at somewhat of an equal place in life. However thinking deeply into the idea of these programs, they are not entirely fair from everyone’s point of view. For example, some people are born with something that Arora refers to as the “natural lottery” which is described as “people who are born with certain talents and attributes- for instance, oratory, musical acumen, physical beauty and health, athleticism, good memory and

“...Successes are far more likely to come from wealthier families.” This quote from Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell goes hand in hand with another controversial quote in the same book. “Who we are cannot be separated from where we’re from.” Every human comes from some background, we all have parents and a birth-town, as well as an income we grew up living off of. Yet do these background have a significant influence on the course of our lives?

In 1971, Thomas Nagel wrote a paper titled ‘The Absurd.’ He argues that the nous of the absurd arises from two belligerent propensities in us: the first is explained as, ‘we take our lives’, or at slightest the ventures we take on in our lives, and that we cannot circumvent. In addition, the second propensity is that we are capable, upon undermining or reflecting, the explanations for any of our ventures in life. Furthermore, from a radical point of view outside people’s interests nothing can be justified; however we are skilled enough in taking up such a perspective reflection. What more can be said is that this absurdity is an ailment we are predestined to by virtue of our reflective nature. Though in general understanding to the idea,

In the article “There are now two Americans. My country is a horror show” by David Simon, Simon writes about how in American people don’t have equal values. The author implies that rich people have the upper hand when it comes to education and employment. This how poor people are less value and have more difficulty on making a better live and achieve better education. This topic is important due to the factor that in the 21st centuries we still see diversity between rich and poor people.

In The Great Gatsby, by F. Scott Fitzgerald, there is a clear divide between the rich and the poor. They hardly even see each other. There are even divides between the rich themselves with the West Egg and the East Egg. But is it really like this now?

Alexis Alonso Thomas Nagel, the author of “What Does It All Mean?” is a man with many wonders. Throughout this book, you will most likely rack your brain with thoughts that question your beliefs. Concepts and ideas that you would have never thought about begin popping up everywhere. Many of these ideas will put your mind to the test and you’ll probably sit on the couch and think about these concepts for hours on end.

Thomas Nagel covers the issues of the purpose of humanity in his piece, “Free Will”. There are several topics that Nagel covers as he starts out hopeful of the idea of free will itself. Free will defined by Merriam Webster as freedom of humans to make choices that are not determined by prior causes or by divine intervention. All our lives we are taught that we do things on our own accord and that we have the right to choose the things that happen to us. He gives the example of choosing between a peach and some cake. This, actually, is not a real example of free will, but rather personal preference that has been predetermined from our upbringing, the environment we are placed in and even and even genetics. I could choose the peach because I know that my predetermined genes will eventually make me into a diabetic so I want to stay as healthy as I can. That in itself does not give me a very wide scope of choices, but more or less narrows it. As he goes on, he explains that we all want to think that we have “free will”. We want to think that we have our own choices and the ability to drive our own lives at our own expense. Yet, when it comes down to it, that is not the case at all. According to his take on it, nothing would be able to be predicted about the future if there was such a thing as free will. A simpler way to look at it is the discussion we had towards the very beginning of the course. We discussed how everything seems to come from something, so how can something come

Every person can be identified as rich or poor regardless of their other status be it in terms of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation or age. The author explained even in the most predominant White race, there were class divisions and the least fortunate were the so

Unfortunately, this fact is so true of our society today, but Yancey goes on to show how Jesus makes an extra effort to reach out to he poor. He gives a list, which he got from another writer, on the advantages of being poor. This list really made an impact on me. It showed me how I need to be more open to what God has to say, and not so involved with the materialistic and secular views of today. I need to focus on what God has planned for me, and not make my focus to be what other people think of me. “Strength, good looks, connections, and the competitive instinct may bring a person success in a society like ours, but those very qualities may block entrance to the kingdom of heaven” (Yancey 114).