Up@dawn 2.0

Tuesday, April 26, 2016

Devin Mahoney (6)

Should freedom be free?
                                       


The social contract theory by definition is the ideology of establishment of moral rules that govern relations among people. It declares the necessity of social order in a productive and safe society. The idea of the “contract” means an agreement among people in a social group to treat others with respect, follow basic human rules and at times, sacrifice some natural freedoms to obtain a greater good.
It has been argued through generations of philosophers the true nature of humans. What would life be like if, as a species we were to throw away our current ideologies and give in to our most basic of impulses and animalistic tendencies? Many would conclude that our world would descend into a nasty, dangerous, and criminal state quite quickly and without much hesitation. Laws of man allow a certain level of constraint and protection from dangers we face as citizens every day. But a rule, as the saying goes, is often made to be broken. It is this exact ideology that perpetuates itself in our society. Laws are only as effective as the subjects enforcing them and the buy in of the citizens contained by them. Laws are not all powerful and the end all deterrents. If this were true what would be the necessity of enforcers of these rules? What purpose would a police force or a judicial system serve if simply agreeing upon a law were the end all? It is the duty of the people in a civilized society to ensure these laws are not only crafted but an unwavering social structure. If people are not willing to sacrifice for the idea of the greater good then progress will always see counter production. For every action there is an equal or opposite reaction. It is the absolute responsibility of each individual person to ensure there is no room in a productive and prospering culture for those who would “cut against the grain.” Those who would argue the evils of a governing body and the necessity of true, unhindered freedom are the wrench in the gears of prosperity. Governments can be corrupt and unjust. People can be selfish and dangerous. But we have to fight against these evils of our nature and accept the beauty of sacrifice for a better world. It is the responsibility of the people to create the utopia. No government body, not individual citizen is more important that the perpetual motion of social progress. If someone stand in the way of this ideal they are a crack in the foundation and must be repaired.
We will either win together or lose together. There is no median in our world today. Now more than ever we have to understand that it is our differences that allow us to be truly free. In a society that requires us to sacrifice the qualities that most would consider animalistic and dangerous, we must celebrate our differences as extensions of our human nature. What makes us different, what makes us unique is not the idea that we have to be completely free from all constraints of man and nature. It is the truth that within these necessary conditions, we can still be free and live unrestricted in a progressive manner. We can together create a better world by agreeing we want it. And by willingly working towards a common goal. Make necessary sacrifices, give up the ideas that do not create a better world and celebrate the ones that make a better individual.






1 comment:

  1. "It is the absolute responsibility of each individual person to ensure there is no room in a productive and prospering culture for those who would 'cut against the grain'” - not sure quite what you mean, but I'm concerned about this formulation. Sounds like a call for vigiliantism and conformism.

    "not the idea that we have to be completely free from all constraints of man and nature. It is the truth that within these necessary conditions, we can still be free and live unrestricted in a progressive manner. We can together create a better world by agreeing we want it. And by willingly working towards a common goal" - am I right to detect here an endorsement of Rousseau's version of the Social Contract? Do you mean to support the General Will as taking precedence over individual liberty?

    ReplyDelete