Emma's Paragraph!

Sorry it's super late... please read & comment, especially on the ending... I feel like that part especially could use some more development. Thanks!

In society today, a handful of disconnected individuals hold power over the rest of the state. They are able to manipulate the other citizens because of their division from them. In close personal relationships, in which the individuals in the relationship trust and respect one another, it is difficult to bring oneself to attempt manipulation or coercion over the other. When a single individual is disconnected from the rest of the society, he feels less guilty or immoral about attempting to manipulate or influence them than he would if he was in a close relationship with all of the people in the society. Ideally, the influential leader would be a voice for the people. All of the people’s ideas for improvement of the state and their security would be channeled through him and relayed back to the wellbeing of the state. He would be able to have close relationships with all of his subjects. There would be no need for manipulation or coercion because the voices of all of the members of the state would be heard. When individuals are engaged in a purely societal relationship, there is more opportunity for one to be in power over the other than if they are in a healthy, personal relationship.

Katie's first paragraph. Everyone please comment!

People are changing themselves frequently. Their identity is never complete or absolute. Ever situation and new experience that one is put through, they are changing themselves to transform to what they feel is appropriate in that situation. In an idealistic world, the society is made for the people. The government should have the individual’s ideals as their main priority, and the society should be there for protection and assurance. They should give the people freedom to state their opinions, and feel as if their opinions matter, but the people should also realize that they have to work with others in that community and therefore alter their own ideals just enough to fit with the others morals to have a functioning society. The only problem with this however, is that it is extremely difficult to come up with ones own opinion without the manipulation of others. One can never have opinions or ideas that have not been created or discovered without others influence. History creates people, as well as the people that they are surrounded by and even the society and daily situation that they have created for themselves. Whenever they are in a new situation, they have changed themselves, if only a little, to fit better into that situation. The individual is taught what to think and how to act, even if they do not realize it. When they are going against something, they are fighting against it because they are reacting to the others who are involved in it. It is almost impossible to have an identity that has not been shaped by others.

Sarah Y's first paragraph

The individual is created by society, but she has the power to make her own decisions and the responsibility to present herself to society as a positive, creative force. Her ability to make decisions that will guide the events of her life in the way that she wishes depends on her access to information and to communication. If she has an understanding of the objective realities of the world, she has a framework within which to make decisions. Her ability to communicate with other members of society gives her a means by which to work towards ends. Her ability to work towards these ends is inhibited by the negative drives inside of her, which compel her to act in destructive ways. Nevertheless, she has the responsibility to use information and communication in a positive way. In order to do that, she must mannage her personal drives so that they do not pollute her action in society. The management of personal negative drives entails a reflective questioning of personal decisions and emotions. A person must actively attempt to create and act without being corrupted by her drives. The individual’s responsibility to be a creative, positive force in society is based on the collective desire of the members of a society that the society itself function as a creative and safe community. The ability of the individual to repress her own negative desires is crucial to the function of a good society because it allows her to function in society as a positive, creative force and it allows society to do the same because it is not busy managing the bad behavior of individuals.

First Paragraph

Group: I'm not sure how to start it, suggestions? And of course any other suggestions to make it better!

______________________________________________________________________

Power, and the struggle of holding or withholding power is an ontological question. The people of modern civil societies are often concerned with who, what, or where they should be. Power then becomes an ontological question because it is at the heart of what one can do and accomplish. Personal power is the ability to limit one’s desires to become an effective member of a specific society. Conversely, social power relies on the ability to control, manipulate, and alter the desires of others. While some desires are natural, such as the desire to eat, sleep, and survive, other desires are constructs of that specific society. Morality is one of the societal constructs as there is no transcendental morality. True and effective social power is the ability to control and manipulate the societal desires of others. While physical power relies on the manipulation of the natural desires, by way of intimidation, true and lasting forms of social power is within the distortion of the societal desires. Operating with the assumption that societies and governments function due to some loose form of social contract, the people in the society are actively agreeing to the rules and governance of that society. From this acceptance, a duty arises for the ruling power to give the people something in return. As such, it is the duty of the government, as the predominant form of power, to teach the people how to limit their desires to comply with the relative morality of the society so the people can function in the society.

Sarah B's first paragraph

This was posted as a comment on the sample paragraph that Elise posted, so I'm just posting it here so we can comment on it as a regular post.

In society power stems from the interactions between people and the state. The state in society derives its power from its interactions with people. Power in a state is directly related to the morality of a state and its citizens, as a just and moral state will inevitably be more functional and harmonious than an immoral and unjust state. A just ruler in a moral state would apply the same morality of the people to himself to ensure that that state is just and the people's rights are being upheld. For the citizens of a state their power lies in freedom. Essentially that is the power of the people in that a just state upholds its citizens to have the right to express themselves without fear of retribution. For people their power lies not only in their freedoms, but also in their interactions with others. Power comes from interacting with others when those interactions allow for the exchanging of knowledge. Knowledge is the key to power for people, and the basis of knowledge in society is education. Education leads to power in society because when people are educated, then they are able to take positions of power in society, and that can help lead to a more just society as a whole. Power in society comes fro structures of power that are a result of relationships between people, when they have either a positive or a negative influence on others.

First Paragraph: Self Power, and our drive towards it.

The will to power that Nietzsche discusses exists as a drive to which man is constantly moving towards. Man attempts to satisfy this drive through several ways, it is easiest to feed ones power drive by establishing power relationship over others, however the most successful and legitimate way is by gaining self-power. Self-power is the most legitimate form of power because its commander and obeyer are of the same being. Whereas when one attempts to hold power over others and use them as a means to satisfy their power drive, the commander is alienated from his obeyer, which results in a loss of power. Individuals who lack legitimate self-power seek after illegitimate abusive power relationships over others, even though this type of power is short lived and satisfies ones drive for power only briefly. To gain legitimate self-power man seeks after knowledge and understanding of the self, which is most successfully brought about by Hegelian negation. Through Hegelian negation an individual is able to experience something completely contradictory to their original self, and then relate it back to what they thought to believe. A forced example of this is when one experiences tragedy, they are forced into an experience contrast to what is normal, and they are able to see themselves with the new sense of perspective. Following the negation of oneself, one gains a deep self-knowledge. As we gain this self-knowledge, it pushes our souls closer to world of Eidos, and empowers us as it forwards the self towards its more perfect form. Man has a drive towards power; this drive is truly satisfied by self-power which is the most legitimate form of power.

Power: Structures of Desire

Here is my first paragraph with thesis which is really the last two sentences. I had a lot of trouble getting what i wanted to say into writing but i think i got it fairly clearly. Please be extremely critical of everything i said and ask lots of hard questions.

As of late, thinking about the state of the world has become a rather depressing pass-time. We face so many issues of such dire importance that it can easily feel overwhelming. It seems as though, regardless of the projected consequences, that we continue practices against our own best interest. In the past this ability to disregard our own self interest was not problematic. It was thought that our existence as a race would not really be put in danger. This, however, is no longer the case and we stare down the very real and sobering possibility of failure as a species. In order to address this problem something radical needs to be done and it needs to happen now. We, as empowered individuals, have the duty to expose the ways in which desire and power are connected so that we can work to shape our desires to promote action that will lead to solutions that will benefit all mankind. In order to do this we must first come to terms with and understand the interconnection of power and desire. The hierarchical ranking of a diverse set of desires is what guides each of us through life. This set of desires forms a structured order within our mind which is the basis for all human action. If we do not have any desire that would guide us toward a particular action we will never perform that action. Conversely, those desires which we prioritize above all of the others cannot be ignored and will be acted upon no matter what. Power is, in essence, the physical representation of desire which allows us to make changes to the world so that it conforms to our desires. Due to the gravity of the problems we face today, it is necessary to expose the ways in which the desires of humans across the world have been manipulated to serve interests that do not coincide with those of the people. In order to ever be able to overcome these problems we must work to consciously re-prioritize our desires, so that they serve our true best interest as well as the best interest of human civilization as a whole.

ok this is a pretty rough draft (duh), sooo let me know i guess. it's maybe a little bit long.

We are fueled by our desires in everything we do. We are propelled into action by both human greed and the intention to do good, and there are uncontrollable urges that cannot be denied and that are different from the desires caused by greed, which are easier to suppress. These desires and urges could harm another person or the whole community if acted upon, so it is necessary to weigh these acts previously instead of impulsively leaping to fulfill them. We always have a choice whether or not to act on impulse, but our impetuous nature may convince us not to hesitate. While it is not necessary to be completely rational begins and always choose reason over desire, we must weigh the consequences of impulsively acting on unreasonable urges; desires will never be completely suppressed, but they can become understood and managed. In society, these unnecessary and dangerous desires must be controlled even more diligently because the societal laws and norms demand conformity from all members in order to maintain the protection of the society. As John Stuart Mill writes: “Everyone who receives the protection of society owes a return for the benefit, and the fact of living in society renders it indispensable that each should be bound to observe a certain line of conduct” (On Liberty, Chapter IV). In order to live peacefully and harmlessly in society, it is necessary to stifle the desires that go against a social contract and to restrain the natural human greed. When we suppress harmful desires, we find that we increase our self-control and become stronger. It is important to be able to control the self rather than the other way around because we have no freedom and cannot function in society if we are constantly being manipulated into our actions by irrational impulses. By controlling both subconscious urges and conscious desires that could prove detrimental to society, an individual becomes personally empowered.

So I know this is way too long but I was trying to get out some of my main ideas. Please lots of suggestions!

Power is so entirely omnipresent on every level in the modern world that it is virtually impossible to make any decision or act in any manner without its involvement. Deriving its origins from the purely physical power of taking a step or moving an object, power has become a complex structure which is manifested throughout the world. Over time, as the human mind became increasingly analytical, it was discovered that creating larger social systems allowed each individual to do less work for a more efficient result. Even in basic systems, human interaction, although necessary to the human psyche, creates disparity, discord, and disagreements. Therefore, some rudimentary structure of government or mutual understanding of particular rules becomes necessary for the system to function as more than a series of arguments. Naturally, smaller systems were controlled by the more physically strong whose power came purely from bodily superiority. In larger systems, however, structures of power become more complex in that physical strength no longer correlated with guaranteed rule; five weak men could easily physically or mentally overpower one strong man. Thus, in such systems, power fell to the individual or group with whom the majority placed their belief; as these social systems grew the complexity of the multifaceted manifestations of power throughout increased exponentially. So that, in the modern world, structures of power both individually and socially are legitimized by people’s belief in them, while simultaneously the structures are able to control the very people who give them power. Moreover, because everything is a social structure of power, individuals cannot separate their thoughts or actions from subjectivity or situation. As a result universal concepts cannot exist. Given this contradicting duality and lack of universality, the individual is faced with the dilemma of human action. In a given situation how is one to decide upon a course of action. In such a complex world the only thing an individual can expect to achieve is a life in which, on the strictly biological level, they experience as much pleasure as possible. While there is no universal method to achieve this end goal, there are general guidelines. A comprehensive education which allows an individual to understand structures of power, analyze each situation, and utilize all parts of the brain is the primary method for attaining these ends. Ultimately, power in the modern world exists in every sphere of both the individual and the social as a contradicting duality; consequently, in order to achieve the most pleasurable life possible, individuals must understand continually shifting structures of power and recognize that both education and an extensive reallocation of belief in the system are necessary to change a power structure.

Individuals change circumstances. They make positive change by critiquing the world, seeing and understanding what needs improvement, gaining support, and working to implement their ideas and better the world around them. While this power to make change, which I will call influence, is not always positive, its existence as a prospect is essential, because it is the only possible way for society to be changed, and thus the only possible way for society to be changed for the better. New ideas and collections of meaning are the first steps towards social progress, and they arise from conversations, encounters, connections, and experiences. An individual tests his idea against the common morality of his people by promoting what he has discovered and working for it, experimenting with his influence and the potential of his idea. An influential individual must then act on his idea. As he spreads his idea to those around him and forms a corps of people that can help him to act, he gains an immense potential power, and when he acts on that potential, he can have a huge influence on the world around him. A completely free public sphere where people can speak their minds and express controversial opinions is crucial in every step of this process; it is the foundation for both individual and public enlightenment. Individual enlightenment is coming to a new and unique understanding; it is breaking out of the common discourse and uncovering a new one. When enlightenment is shared as an individual reveals a new discourse and acts to bring about change, social progress can be made.

Natalie's first paragraph and thesis

Here it is, have at it. I'm really trying to differentiate between the powerful and the government, and the different roles and responsibilities of each. Any clarity you guys can shed on that subject would be great. I'm also having trouble with transitioning from my paragraph into my final sentence (my thesis). Thanks everyone!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In a society, there are individuals with power who are not necessarily part of the government. Their power comes from their ability to conceptualize ideas, and convince others to follow these ideas. This power, derived from rational arguments with which people agree, allows the individual to seize control of the people, directing it in favor of the government or against it. These individuals must create ideas that are moral, in order to legitimize their power and act as a benevolent force on society rather than a terror over it. Meanwhile, the government has a responsibility to protect the civil liberties and security of the society should the powerful individuals become a threat. If the arguments of the powerful are rational enough, but immoral, the unenlightened individuals of a society may be drawn toward them, and away from a domineering, if secure, government. The government cannot prevent powerful individuals from shaping the society, but they can attempt to prevent them from harming it. Although the goal of the powerful and the government should be to bring all individuals to a state of enlightenment through education and the creation of a sphere for intellectual discussions, this will take considerable time and the government must protect the civil liberties of the society while it is still immature. The powerful have a responsibility to create moral ideas for individuals within a society to believe in and follow.

Dan's first paragraph + thesis

This is more just a collection of thoughts than a formal paragraph...but it is a start

PLEASE ask questions, help me find any holes in this argument, be critical of my ideas, etc, so I have some good feedback when I begin to write.

Power exists in both an ontological and a socially constructed form, and power is everywhere. Power exists within localized sites, and is the structuring force of our world. This can be a positive structuring force that is largely good for everyone, or it can be a negative structuring force that benefits a few at the expense of others. However, power can never be repressive, it is an exclusively expressive force. It is the moral thing to do to confront both overarching systems of power and question local technologies of power to neutralize negative constructions of power and create positive constructions. Power over the self and reducing inner conflict is essential to confronting negative systems of power. The issues of power (in both a systematic sense and a local sense) are in part a psychological one, and therefore mastery over the self is an important tool for confronting power structures. Within the material world, power is the structuring force that allows for domains of social interaction to exist. To neutralize negative manifestations of power, and to create positive structures of power, one must first master power within the self. Further, examining the aims of power structures that masquerade as legitimate, inevitable and ontological but in fact exist to create inauthentic expressions within a populace to benefit a select class is also crucial to constructing structures of power that benefit all. Finally, is important to examine the technologies of power, both the inevitable technologies that evolve as part of our historical moment in time, and the socially ones aimed at serving the interest of a particular group. Examining the power of language, of social structures and social ideology, of representation, and of identify, just to name a few, are critical behaviors to creating just structures of power lending themselves to equality. Any system that is designed to benefit a select few at the expense of others is unjust, and will ultimately fail to meet the needs of all. Mastery over the self, questioning the legitimacy of all power structures, and examining the technologies of power are necessary tools for an individual to confront negative manifestations of power and attempt to neutralize them, and then to create power structures that are just, equal, and positive.

first paragraph rough draft

Knowledge generates power. The individual’s power increases with the amount of knowledge he acquires, and decreases when that knowledge is considered insignificant or commonplace. As society educates the individual, he can acquire unbiased knowledge when he distances himself from society and views it objectively. By examining society and understanding how it works, he can develop an understanding the minds of his contemporaries. When he is able to convince others that his knowledge is worthwhile, he will be given attention and cooperation. This suggests that power is the reputation of knowledge, rather than the knowledge itself. The individual’s ability to convince his others relies on a knowledge of how best to converse with them and convince them that his knowledgeable is valuable. So man’s power is his both his factual education and his understanding of the natures of the society and its people. With this understanding, he can determine the course of action most likely to successfully achieve his goals. Knowledge is power.

a first paragraph.... just an illustration.

In the words of Oscar Wilde, “Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else’s opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation” (De Profundis). This is the most definite phrase in portraying the nature and possession of freedom in human lives. Freedom is the ability to fully translate one’s free will, which is the ability to make choices based upon experience. As members of a society and citizens of the world, humans are inevitably engaged in a globe of influences which leave perpetual impressions in the making of their identity. Time, society, and relationships all collectively and individually effect the development of one’s psychological and physical characteristics. Absolute freedom only exists in a state completely void of all influences of time, society, and relationships. Therefore, affected by so many external causes, freedom in human life is nonexistent. However, within the human conscious lies a sensual perception of freedom; the belief that they can obtain and do possess a type of freedom. This freedom is a psychological concept, existing solely as a state of mind, but which has the most meaning in their lives. To humans, freedom is “A necessity of deliberating…consequently allows a liberty choosing that, which upon consideration, we prefer” (Locke, 25). The absence of freedom does not concern humans as much as the ability to create perceptions of their own relative freedoms does. Humans come to understand their relative freedoms through acts of choosing and determining their capabilities in their worlds. The subconscious deliberation of a belief in personal freedom is the understanding in which humans should strive to achieve. To accept that absolute freedom is unattainable and to realize and rest content with one’s own abilities and personalized concept of freedom which he creates, is the ultimate truth of human existence. Realization and acceptance of this truth is the most crucial part of human life. It is the catalyst which will deliver them to the most self-appreciated source of freedom they can have, a freedom that is not a collective responsibility or ownership, but wholly personal and of greater value because of this particular significance; their own freedom.

Hannah Arendt

--Born 1906 in Konigsberg, lives in Paris, moves to NY in 1940.

First book-1951-Origins of Totalitarianism—attempts to explain the appeal of totalitarianism. She becomes one of the first to say that Nazism and Communism are both issues of totalitarianism.

-Arendt ccvers Adolf Eichmann trial and writes that it’s all just part of a sickly bureaucratic system. This leads to the “banality of evil.” --Evil in the modern world has become common place; it’s just following orders, trying to be efficient, being part of the system.

Civil Disobedience

Civil disobedience is a group action. It’s about trying to make a difference in politics. à“Civil disobedience can be tuned to necessary and desirable change or to necessary and desirable preservation or restoration of the status quo—the preservation of rights…or the restoration of the proper balance of power in the government” (75).

It is different from the conscientious objector (which is what she calls Thoreau and Socrates).

Thoreau says, and Arendt agrees, that when wrongs committed are “of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another…then, I say, break the law” (60).

àBut Arendt says that this is something you’re obligated to do out of conscience; it is unpolitical—it’s not concerned so much with the world or the wrong; it’s just doing what is right.

àShe notes difference between “good person” and “good citizen.” Thoreau is being a “good person.” He’s doing what he thinks is right. “Good citizens” are acting consciously for their country’s benefit (62).

àThe civil disobedient comes into being when conscience gets changed to opinion in the “market place.” With numbers, opinion becomes public opinion, which is what gives it strength/possibility of being considered as truth. à“In the market place, the fate of conscience…[is that] it becomes an opinion, indistinguishable from other opinions. And the strength of opinion does not depend on conscience, but on the number of those with whom it is associated” (68).

àSo both numbers and institutions become essential. She’s taking from Tocqueville hereàif you want to be politically effective/have an impact, you have to create a movement and find allies.

à“The civil disobedient…never exists as a single individual; he can function and survive only as a member of a group” (55).

à“Civil disobedients…are in fact organized minorities, bound together by common opinion, rather than by common interest, and the decision to take a stand against the government’s policies even if they have reason to assume that these policies are backed by a majority: their concerted action springs from an agreement with each other, and it is this agreement that lends credence and conviction to their opinion, no matter how they may originally have arrived at it” (56).

àThe civil disobedient is separate from the criminal—instead of trying to get away with his action, the civil disobedient acts deliberately out of opinion/conscience, and he wants to show his actions.

àLaws will always strike some of us as imperfect; there will always be potential conflicts between laws and consciences. We have to honor those conflicts. We can’t just ignore them; we have to look at them, learn from them, and accept them as part of politics.

àThe civil disobedient is different from the revolutionary. He accepts the general authority/legitimacy of the system of laws (77). The laws are only legitimate as long as you have the right to dissent.

àAs good citizens, we have to keep our promises unless “unexpected circumstances arise, [or] the mutuality inherent in all promises is…broken” (93).

à“The law can indeed stabilize and legalize change once it has occurred, but the change itself is always the result of extralegal action” (80).

àCivil disobedience is essential to America. It’s not criminal act, it’s working to better your country. It’s the way to make change. She says we should “find a recognized niche for civil disobedience in our institutions of government” (99). It’s so important that it should be legally recognized.

WikiLeaks Documentary

http://www.esoterictube.com/wikirebels.html


Above is a link to a documentary about WikiLeaks that i found quite interesting. Seeing as i did my case study on the censorship of WikiLeaks i already knew a lot of the history but i think the analysis and interviews on there are really good. If you take the time to watch it let me know what you think.

Read this.

Hannah Arendt, Eichmann in Jerusalem: On the Banality of Evil
[The following is in response to a story Arendt tells of Anton Schmidt, an SS officer who in the course of his travels through Poland helped Jewish partisans by supplying them with forged papers and military trucks for a period of five months before he was caught and executed.]

"The holes of oblivion do not exist. Nothing human is that perfect, and there are simply too many people in the world to make oblivion possible. One man will always be left alive to tell the story. Hence, nothing can ever be 'practically useless,' at least, not in the long run. It would be of great practical usefulness for Germany today, not merely for her prestige abroad but for her sadly confused inner condition, if there were more such stories to be told. For the lesson of such stories is simple and within everyone's grasp. Politically speaking, it is that under conditions of terror most people will comply but some people will not, just as the lesson of the countries to which the Final Solution was proposed is that 'it could happen' in most places but it did not happen everywhere. Humanly speaking, no more is required, and no more can reasonably be asked, for this planet to remain a place fit for human habitation."