Individual And Society In Bowling Alone And Kwon's On Liberty

This essay argues that John Stuart Mill's On Liberty presents a strong case for individuality of citizens, challenging the role of paternalism through autonomous social progress and utilitarian values. On the other hand, it is shown that Mill's arguments against public regulations are very narrow, and his own ideas frequently adhere to paternalism, thus creating a weak defence against state control politics.

In the essay, “The Common Life” by Scott Russell Sanders, Sanders studies the connection between the individual and society. However, this leads to the question, what is the relationship between the individual and society? Individuals and societies may be in opposition but this helps to develop both the individual and society. The decisions that an individual makes reflects on how society views him/her. The overlook of the community can be reverted back to the individual within the society. Society and individuals are a package deal.

Emerson has issue with society. He believes that the conformity and “encroachment on peoples’ liberties [hindered the individual.] He says people should look for individual freedom, and in finding that freedom, people will achieve self-reliance” (Yanella 4, 13). More so Emerson does not trust the system that governs society. He sees society as a “joint stock company that is in conspiracy with every one of its members” (“Self-Reliance” 535). Society can be seen as a hindrance on individual thought because a lot of times people will do what society or authority tells them to do without thinking of themselves first.

Opportunities for personal growth presented a new definition of Jefferson’s pursuit of happiness that well fitted a new America in which westward expansion and market relations shattered old spatial and social boundaries. A group of New England intellectuals, called “transcendentalists,” reflected this national mood in their writings and activities. Together they insisted that individual judgment should take precedence over existing social traditions and institutions. Ralph Waldo Emerson defined freedom as an open-ended process of self-realization, in which individuals could remake themselves and their own lives. Henry David Thoreau called for individuals to rely on themselves.

In many works of literature, authors express their viewpoints on society and times in which they live. In the essay “Self Reliance” by Ralph Waldo Emerson, and the book Walden by Henry David Thoreau, the authors speak out against conformity and materialism in society. Both were romanticism authors during the 1800s. They focused on simplicity and individuality. Both writings can advise teenagers today on the importance of non-conformity and the value of rejecting materialism.

Within Mill's 'On Liberty' it is clear that he has a high regard for the issues surrounding freedom and it's limits. Mill is an advocate of negative freedom, as a liberal he believes that there should be no restraints on an individual's freedom unless it is hindering the freedom or health of another person. One of the main reasons as to why Mill values liberty is because it contributes to personal development. Thus Mill argues that in order for individuals to develop they should be able to perform 'experiments' in living', which allow individuals to go through a system of trial and error until they find their own

In this essay, I will discuss how the theories of John Stuart Mill and W.E.B. Du Bois, as presented in On Liberty and The Souls of Black Folk respectively, relate to the individual’s development and necessary conditions to thrive in modern society. I will focus on the goal of self-realization and development, or in other words, an individual’s pursuit to find meaning in their lives, and close with the authors’ directions for individuals to facilitate this pursuit for themselves and others. Both were concerned that dominant opinions in a society would prevent individuals from choosing new paths in life, instead of common ones, such as attending trade school in Du Bois’ time. The pursuit of self-realization is affected by society’s prevailing sentiment toward individuals who differ from perceived norm because the majority’s mindset affects the likelihood and ability of an individual to seek self-realization. In addition, the majority opinion can dissuade the individual from deviating from the norm at all, causing social and economic stagnation. This is in part the case because self-realization often involves some deviation from the norm, which is synonymous with Mill’s concept of “plurality of paths” (Mill 69), wherein the paths are deliberately unique and novel.

When discussing why societies are better with deep social capital, Putnam writes “dense networks of interaction probably broaden the participants' sense of self, developing the "I" into the "we” (Putnam, 1995, pp. 2-3). To me, this means that when people are not concerned with only themselves but also with others, things like peace building and community involvement occur. In terms of peace building, if social capital was dense and I had a high social capital level, when something intrigued me and drove me to advocate for peace such as ending violence, it wouldn’t be a fight that I was starting alone but instead the “we” would help fight this battle. For me, this means that if I really want to make a difference in this world, I need to be more involved and increase my social capital. By doing so, I can impact others to do the same and the chances of building peace as a community would be greater. Furthermore, the piece in the article where he ties the whole concept of social capital and its decline to bowling really hit home for me. When it is put in perspective in such a way that Putnam did to describe how even bowling has decreased in profits because people prefer now to bowl alone rather than a s a group or in a league, it really forced one to reflect upon their own involvement. (Putnam, 2010). If as a society and even myself we continue to not fully engage with others but rather masked by technology and our own life circumstances, peace will never be built. As someone who believes in social justice, I know that peace is something I want to help build and thus need to change my social capital

Imagine a world where there is no society. Imagine if there was no technology and everybody just lived in isolation. In Emerson’s essay, “Self-Reliance,” he illustrates his ideas on the tenet by using metaphors. Nonconformity means being mentally and physically separated from society, a quality which sometimes overlaps with the ideas behind self-reliance. In “Where I Lived and What I Lived For,” Thoreau uses personal experiences, description, and problem-and-solution. Emerson and Thoreau begin by using different techniques, Thoreau using problem-and-solution and description, while Emerson uses cause-and-effect, yet both use cause-and-effect to develop the idea that one should be independent of society in the end.

In “Self-Reliance”, by Ralph Waldo Emerson, the audience can see a theme of a desire for an individualistic society. Ralph Emerson wrote: “Whoso would be a man, must be a nonconformist” (935). This statement is

Society and Solitude written by Ralph Waldo Emerson states what society means to him. Emerson states, “ To be a member of society is to be a conformist, and this makes self reliance impossible.” (Emerson paragraph 2)This quote explains that Emerson believes that to live in our society you have to go with the normal. He states that society makes it hard to come up with your own ideas or opinions. Emerson emphasizes that “It is so easy with the great to be great; so easy to come up with an existing standard.” (Emerson paragraph 1) Emerson is saying that if you have all the ingredients to be great than you will be, and if not then you won’t. In his essay Emerson believes that society will break a person, and it is better to have your own morals and ideas. This

The written word,now a weapon, is now digitized and feed through media. “A book is a loaded gun in the house next door. Burn it. Take the shot from the weapon.” (Bradbury 58). Not only have books become a media revolution so has social interaction. Social media allows for connections formerly unheard. “The problem, they say, is that we spend so much time maintaining superficial connections online that we aren’t dedicating enough time or effort to cultivating deeper real-life relationships.”(WSJ). This avenue of socialization allows for discretion of the true life and person of the poster. “And even worse, the human condition is beginning to devolve. We have become addicted to the vanity of social media unable to expose our lives to the world.”(Green). This media based socialization can overtake the lives of many. “When you add it all up, the average American spends more than 10 hours a day plugged into some form of media.”(Synder). Making the human race even more technology

We as a human race have become a byproduct of our society. Through media, technology, and social pressure, humans no longer run society, but it seems like we are run by society. The quote from sociologist Peter Berger states “Not only do people live in society but society lives in them” This statement is referring to a form of social control were groups and the people in those groups conform to society partially knowingly and partially as a reflection based on dominant social expectations. As I further explain Berger’s statement I will explain how individuality, identity, and freedom fit in to such a predetermined future.

As a logical consequence, Postmes and Brunsting (2002) reasoned that the Internet is changing society because people's cognitive processes, triggered by access to information and communication, replace the strong social ties that traditionally underpin committed activism. In simpler words, in the past, humanity used the herd instinct as the main driving force behind committed forms of activism. Thanks to the Internet, we climb another step or three on the evolutionary ladder, and simply do away with the herd instinct and replace it with reason. The argument, if put this way, does not sound particularly strong. What can be taken away is that social media is still evolving, that social media changes the way we – or most of us communicate, that social media is used in social and political activism, and that the Internet increases quantitative if not qualitative access to information.

Society is constantly changing and will continue to change in the future. The change is predictable because people change their ideas, routines, and views frequently. One of the topics that is typically brought up when discussing the influences on how society is changing, is social networking. There are two sides to every story. One side of the effects of social networking is that it is beneficial to society by informing people on particular situations in the world and on current important events. The other side views social networking as dangerous and drama filled. While there are benefits and dangers to social networking's effects on society, I will argue that social networking has changed society more negatively than positively.