Sor Filotea De La Cruz

The interrelationship between “The Overcoat,” written by Nikolai Gogol, and “Gogol,” written by Jhumpa Lahiri, may not be apparent at first, but with the help of “My Two Lives,” also written by Jhumpa Lahiri, one can see that both “The Overcoat” and “Gogol” are connected by ties that hold them together. Although Gogol and the speaker in “My Two Lives” share similar backgrounds and can directly relate to each other, Akaky can also connect to Lahiri and Gogol because all they all yearn for acceptance from those around them. One point of comparison is the practice of naming connects Akaky, from “The Overcoat”, and Gogol together by having similar practices. Another similarity between all three works is that each main character questions their identity, eventually overcoming their struggle of being seen as different.

In my essay I will discuss whether Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s “The Social Contract” signals the advent of modern democratic republicanism or whether it represents a dangerous recipe for the suppressing of individual liberty. I will begin my essay by briefly explaining what is meant by modern democratic republicanism and individual liberty. I will then give a detailed account of Rousseau’s Social Contract Theory and discuss what he means when he talks about ‘general will’. Furthermore, I will talk about his concepts on a sovereign, the law-giver and his civil religion. I will discuss why he can sometimes be viewed as an advocate of totalitarianism rather than one of democratic republicanism. I will briefly mention why his work can be viewed as

Sor Juana Ines De La Cruz: “Reply To Sor Filotea De La Cruz” Reflection paper

Jean Jacques Rousseau and Edmond Burke may appear to fall on opposite extremes of political ideology. Credited with having inspired the French Revolution, Rousseau is seen a proponent of liberalism. Denouncing the French revolution on the other hand Burke is seen a strong advocate of conservatism. As far removed from one another as these political ideologies may be, in some key areas, some of the fundamental elements constituting the building blocks of of Rousseau and Burke’s individual political thoughts are to a certain degree comparable. Highlighted in this paper, is their understanding of the freedom and liberty of man.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau poses the question if “there is peace in dungeons [would] that [be] enough to make dungeons desirable?” (Rousseau). His argument here is that society should never settle for a strict (and secure) political structure if it does not allow for civil freedom. His perpetual fascination and desire for civil freedom manifest itself to consume much of his work. From the first words of the text in The Social Contract (1762), Rousseau declares “man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains” (Rousseau). He speaks to the suffocation and struggle he endures in what he declares an intolerable position that is thrust on to free men that are forced to live in the confined and miserable dungeon known as society. Instead, Rousseau promotes a social and political life that offers civil freedom and equality on all fronts. Discourse on Inequality (1755) and The Social Contract (1762) are two radical texts that focus on challenging the status quo of the 18th Century regarding the ruling of the government, political institutions, and individuals within the confines of society. His arguments are the catalysts that spark a new outlook, a

The question of what it means to be free, or what it means to live in a free society, is a debate central to most political theorists. The notion of what freedom or liberty means varies from theorist to theorist, and depends on the historical context in which it is conceived in. For the purposes of this paper, the focus will be on the opposing accounts of freedom set out by Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, writing in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, respectively. The difference between Hobbes’s and Rousseau’s accounts of freedom and liberty depends on how each theorist views society in achieving freedom, either as a positive or negative factor. The consequences of such, such as what type of political system would be best suited for a society then follow from how they see society in achieving and preserving freedom. Hobbes’ conception of genuine freedom is through the notion that a societal contract is best able to provide this, even though it may contradict and replace “natural” freedoms. Rousseau, on the other hand, believes that genuine freedom was at its pinnacle in a primitive, pre-modern time, and that society, by the time he was writing in, corrupted the ability for individuals to live lives that were truly free. Both Rousseau and Hobbes ultimately believe that their respective freedoms can be achieved and sustained in political orders with the people as the sovereign, who would always act in their best interests. Freedom (used interchangeably with

Most picaresque novels are written in autobiographical form, presenting one view of the world as seen through the eyes of the first-person narrator. This character leads a rather unfortunate life, experiencing many trials and tribulations during the course of a hard existence. He or she is most often of very humble origins…He often resorts to a life in which crime and corruption become the means to survive, as a character operating on the margins of society. The picaro is not always taken aback by the immorality of some of his actions, since he acts in the interests of his own survival. Immorality surrounds him and he is aware of it, but he becomes immersed in it through the lifestyle which he must necessarily lead. In addition, in the course of his life, he lives with and serves various masters, lacking a permanent home or locus of action for the extent of the tale or for very long periods of time. The picaresque novel thus presents a certain harsh realism, one in which the very underside of life is exposed, and in which idealistic notions of how to live cannot function. Consequently, there is usually no place for love—emotionally and socially constructive love, idealized love—in the life of the

While one might not go as far as to see them as completely opposite, but they are at the very least distinctively different. Rousseau, Mill, and Constant exhibit a very different view of the modernizing society. This paper seeks to flash out the distinct visions of liberty that Rousseau, Mill, and Constant articulated by unpacking the central premises of each argument, pitting them against each other through comparing and contrasting.

While one might not go as far as to see them as completely opposite, but they are at the very least distinctively different. Rousseau, Mill, and Constant exhibit a very different view of the modernizing society. This paper seeks to point out the distinct visions of liberty that Rousseau, Mill, and Constant articulated by unpacking the central premises of each argument, pitting them against each other through comparing and contrasting.

As it avows to depict reality and change is a fundamental feature of reality, it is imperative that the realist novel changes constantly as well. This implies that the structural foundation of a Bildungsroman would also have to be modified in order to make it contemporary and also realist. The nature of this change, especially in the European context is obvious in terms of the transformation of the novel from depicting stability into a genre which hinges on the inherent instability of a society. In his essay on this topic, Franco Moretti in his introduction to The Way of the World argues that the new novel is the transformative novel. In this, he uses the model of the novel of adultery in which the growth of a character is located in the sphere of adultery and thereby is essentially an unstable stability. This instability forms the foundation of the novel form in one more significant aspect; one which is critical for Chughtai’s Shaman as well. Youth is important for the central protagonist because it is the site of potential which is hitherto untapped. This potential encapsulates the heroic potential of the protagonist and manifests itself in the larger system of causality in the text. The trajectory which the central protagonist will choose to follow is begun in a young age. The decisions of the character work as milestones against which one may measure the success or the degree of closure provided by the ending. However, as Moretti further elaborates, this Bildungsroman encapsulates within it another paradox; the individual’s growth cannot be parallel to societal growth as the social sphere exists in order to suppress the individual. This implies that any authentic Bildungsroman hinges on the discovery of a stable and viable alternative. That the protagonist will in some way find a balance between the self and the world and therefore s/he will be able to develop personally as well as socially. This developmental

The concept of modernism and the values which this particular movement upheld were ones that literary nobles demonstrated in their works for a long period of time; a whole era and some may even argue, is still valued in present time. Despite the extent to which these characters and stories may be fictionalised, each one illustrate a particular intrinsic feature that are prevalent in all individuals, and therefore embody a certain value that is held conventional in the context which they live in; in this case, my lecture will be an inquiry into the nature of modernism, more specifically how this particular context epitomized the moral spectrum and attitude of these characters. A close study of the classic modernist texts The Sun Also Rises and

In “On the Social Contract,” Jean-Jacques Rousseau famously declares, “Man was/is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” In this essay, I will attempt to explain this famous quote of Rousseau’s. Moreover, through a careful exposition of “On the Social Contract,” I intend to explain Rousseau’s proposed solution to the conundrum of freedom in society.

“The strongest is never strong enough to be always the master, unless he transforms strength into right, and obedience into duty”. Therefore in order to obtain power it is essential to understanding it as Rousseau states. For, one must force right and duty on man to make them free in the sovereign. In his writings from the social contract Rousseau outlines what the sort of government should be. Therefore, the aim of this essay will firstly be to analyze and outline Rousseau’s held beliefs on the form of governments. Secondly, what this sort of government will achieve. Finally the essay will examine Rousseau’s contribution to political thought in contemporary era.

The few ruled the majority. If this is his aim, then it follows that he should be most concerned with the preservation of freedom in political society, initially so that savage man might be lured out of nature and into society in the first place, and afterwards so that Rousseau’s framework for this society will prevent the present totalitarianism in his time from reasserting itself.

Jacques is arguably one of the most influential philosopher and thinkers not only during the Enlightenment era in France and across Europe but also through the development of modern political and educational work where many have been inspired by his writings. His ideas result from his belief that every state has its origin in people who gave birth to its political structure, fundamental laws and civil liberties. (Rousseau lecture1) Moreover Rousseau paid great attention to nature and human feelings. He claimed that humans are naturally independent and held a belief that ‘’man is born free and everywhere he is in chains’’ (Rousseau, 2012, pg. 12 ) arguing that people in the state of nature were fundamentally good and pure but became corrupt and evil through the institution of civilised society (lecture). On the contrary, Rousseau remains to be a huge supporter of the social contract theory, which is considered by him as the source of states legitimacy, criticises social inequality, authoritarianism and feudalism. As an important social contract theorist, he also elaborates that people are the creators of law as well as the subject of law and because they will provide themselves with the laws they wish to live by, the people 's sovereignty is assured by the societies contract that is created (Bertram, 2010). In his writings The Social Contract or Principles of Political Right, Rousseau amplifies on the concept of the general will. In this essay I will explain and asses