Social Dilemmas In A Divergent

1976. The conflict created when the will of an individual opposes the will of the majority is the recurring theme of many novels, plays, and essays. Select the work of an essayist who is in opposition to his or her society; or from a work of recognized literary merit, select a fictional character who is in opposition to his or her society. In a critical essay, analyze the conflict and discuss the moral and ethical implications for both the individual and the society. Do not summarize the plot or action of the work you choose.

The Erudite faction is known for their knowledge and they think ignorance was the cause of the war that divided them into factions. There are symbols through the story like that fact that people from Erudite wear blue because it is a color that supposedly stimulates the brain that show how much they value knowledge. As a result they eliminate everyone who is considered ignorant for disobeying their orders. This is a way to control the society and population. In Divergent an important oppressive character is Jeanine Matthews. Jeanine Matthews is the leader of the Erudite which continuously oppresses the society. In the book Jeanine Matthews says the line “Amazing, isn't it? Everything we think of that makes up a person - thoughts, emotions, history - all wiped away by chemistry.” that supports the fact that she values knowledge and more important erases those things that makes us humans. Another way that Erudite uses control to oppress the others is that Jeanine Matthews writes articles about Abnegation that are based on lies to make them look bad and be disliked by the

The practices of a collective society such as the one in this book disregard all belief in the individual. By doing this, the society and its leaders brainwash the people into having no personal priority or authority. Everything is done with the betterment of the entire group in mind, no sense of self involvement. Their life is fated in almost every

  The books Brave New World by Aldus Huxley and Anthem by Ayn Rand are both valuable twentieth-century contributions to literature. Both books explore the presence of natural law in man and propose a warning for what could happen when man's sense of right and wrong is taken from him. In this essay, I hope to show how these seemingly unrelated novels both expound upon a single, very profound, idea.

Deviance is an act that goes against the social norms such as rules or expectations. It can be something small such as running through the stop signs or it can be something big such as hijacking an airplane. Deciding if the act is deviant or not depends on the context (society, environment, etc.). According to Howard S. Becker, it is not the act itself, but the reactions to the act that, makes something deviant. Deviance is not a word that is used for judging people, but it is used to refer to an act to which people respond negatively. Norms vary among different cultural groups, therefore, one deviant act in one group might not be deviant to another. For example, it will be considered deviant or going against the norm if someone decided to

Amity farm the land and strive for kindness and harmony. You will never see a member of Amity angry or upset. Abnegations are called stiffs for their particular inability to be interesting or stand out. They enjoy the simple life and selflessness. They are dedicated to helping others (including the Factionless) which makes them perfect to run the government. This is the category that Tris was born into. Finally, the Factionless, where those who do not belong in any of these categories go. They do not have a home base or any structure to receiving food or jobs. The Factionless does not have the opportunity to participate in the Choosing Ceremony even if they become of age. The tone of the movie is set when Tris, in preparation for the Choosing Ceremony says, “It all works, everyone knows where they belong… Except me.”

At its core, is mankind essentially good, or does it use law and order to mask its evil? Through his book The Lord of the Flies, William Golding causes questions concerning the ethicality of humanity to rise to the surface of the mind. The stripping away of distractions and structure he depicts in his all-too-real novel reveals society’s true nature. As a reader studies the settings, characters and plots of Lord of the Flies and how they relate to significant events in recent times, Golding’s message of the evil nature of humanity becomes increasingly clear and impactful.

After rebuilding an item from the Unmentionable Times, Equality begins to contemplate about his purpose and personal identity, “And a strange thought comes to us: we wonder, for the first time in our life, what we look like. Men never see their own faces and never ask their brothers about it, for it is evil to have concern for their own faces or bodies. But tonight, for a reason we cannot fathom, we wish it were possible to use to know the likeness of our own person” (Rand 21). Throughout the novel, Equality’s government forbids the community from obtaining any knowledge on their history. They force characters to live according to the way they set laws, and made it so that asking or having any information that was considered “unacceptable” was morally wrong; they claimed the Unmentionable Times were cruel times, and that they wanted to prevent such chaos again. In forcing a society to groupthink, people will never be able to introduce themselves to different lifestyles and experiences that would help them create their own opinions and values. By thinking as one, true happiness cannot be found- instead, people would simply be distracted by the routines they have adapted rather than living according to what is best suited for themselves. Without the introduction of new ideas, or anyone to initiate a change for better living, an irrational government is bound to grow.

Madison’s rhetorical comparison of men to angels emphasizes that human nature is less than angelic. Essentially if men were angels there would be no crime or conflict, there would not be a necessity for a government or any accountability because there would be no fear of tyranny. Men are not angels and are susceptible to corruption, Madison’s quote speaks caution in the approach of a big

Rules have been around since the beginning of time for the purpose of safety and control in a population. But, what happens when there are more rules in place for the sake of control as opposed to safety? The novel Anthem shows that when there are more rules for control of individuals’ minds, they will be broken because the individuals realize there is more to be discovered than what they are being told. This can be seen through the plot and climax, as well as in the characterization of the protagonist and antagonist, and through Equality 7-2521’s first person point of view.

“What is not thought by all men cannot be true” is the common belief in the totalitarian world of Anthem (73). In this post-apocalyptic and altruistic society people can only exists through the service to their brothers, and individual thoughts and actions are shunned upon. Equality 2-72521 is brilliant, using technologies he found from before the “great rebirth” to formulate new conclusions about the virtually unexplored world of his time. With individualism shunned, personal thought is prohibited as well. Idiosyncrasy of anyone is looked upon as evil because it is different from other brother men, so people are bred to be and think the same. Science and technology are advanced upon with the thought of individuals coming up with new hypothesis

Although humankind attempts its best at preventing evil actions, eventually evil rises above all else. While humans are living ordinary lives and living in ignorance, evil is always scheming and waiting to slide up behind the turned backs of society as depicted in William Golding’s Lord of the Flies. One could argue that this is not the case and that good deeds always overshadow evil and that evil is just an occasional blip. However, what one’s opinion of society does not outshine the cold hard facts of humankind’s natural tendencies; specifically, how things are never as they seem, how easily humans can betray their emotions and how humans choose to ignore difficult situations in the search for an easy

Instead of showing characteristics from just her new faction (Dauntless) or her old faction (Abnegation), Tris tends to show characteristics from other factions too such as Erudite. Her response to the dog in her aptitude test was considered intelligent and courageous because of the fact that she did not run in fear of getting attacked. Instead, she leaned down and was nice to the dog. In the Dauntless manifesto it states; “We believe in ordinary acts of bravery, in the courage that drives one person to stand up for another” and that is exactly what Tris did in two situations throughout the book. (Roth pg. 47) The Abnegation inside her shined through when she chose to jump on the visious dog to save the inoccent little girl who's intention was only to pet the dog. The second situation was when she stood up for Al and took his place in front of the target while Four threw knives. She did this because she believed that anyone can stand in front of a target and that it does not prove anything. After all, she did reveal this

I live in a society of “misfits”. Money is everything in the society I live in. Good hearted people are never shown to have as much value or worth as those with the biggest banks. In many ways people who fight the hardest to win, ends up coming up short due to the price tags. I constantly feel like I am in the middle of these battles. I was never a fan of conformity, it always made “different” bad, I don’t agree with that, the world needs mavericks.

Her next attack is against Habermas' assumption that instead of having several publics, only one discursive public should exist. To her such a singularity means to snatch the prerogative of an individual's opinion of him. According to Freud's definition of defense mechanism, most of us like to associate with the more powerful or dominant identity, as to hide our own lack of influence. Citizens in such an arena would be forced against voicing their opinions or suggestions. She encourages segregated groups from the point of view of subaltern counter-publics as well, stating examples of women's revolutions. She points out, that multiplicity will widen the horizons as well as the audience for a variety in discourse, which, she points out, is the primary purpose of discourse. An objective, neutral culture cannot exist. It would demand a uniform approach and dictate norms for