Social Contract Essay Example for Free

Social Contract Essay Discuss the view that morality is a social contract (30 marks) Jean-Jacques Rousseau said Man was born free, and he is everywhere in chains and what he is trying to show is that a social contract is binding on the members of a society, everywhere he is bound to be moral. The sources and reasons for the upholding morality (that is what is right and what is wrong) has been questioned since the days of Plato and one answer was given by Thomas Hobbes a contractarian answer. A contractarian believes that human beings are self-interested and it would be rational for him to co-operate with others. Hobbes developed this view by making us aware of the (imagined) state of nature in Leviathan (1651) in which people were present before any form of social cohesion and organisation. Hobbes asserts that at this time, everyone would look out for their self-interest but this would involved a great deal of hostility and an inability to do things out of fear (a humans self-interest could be to steal from you and thus cause you fear). Life would be a torment; war of all against all is how Hobbes puts it. The solution to this is cooperating between people. The implication of this is that there is no morality independent of what people in any given society think. There are however problems with this namely historically there has never been any contract. If we looking historically, we have made agreements (be it the Fourth Geneva Convention or the Magna Carta) but there has never been a collective social moral contract. Humans appear to be innately social. Indeed, it is not even just humans ants appear to work in colonies. Further, a contract would only be understood by a social being. As a result of there being no contract (factually), it would seem to make the idea redundant for if I havent signed anything, why should I be obligated? Although we can object and say that Hobbes isnt saying that people sat around and signed a codified document rather what he is suggesting is that if we were to imagine the state of nature to be the case, it would justified for us to accept such a contract hence giving a justification for us to be moral (as well as the existence of societies). However, there seems to remain one problem. By saying that societies develop morality and that there is no morality independent of this, it leaves us with the problem of cultural relativism. For it would be right in a society to kill all the enemies if thats what society determines, in the case of the Nazis it would be the Jews, yet seldom do we find someone who would actually call this moral and not demand action be taken. We could however say that the contract applies universally and that we have not reached the signing. Yet this is not what the contract is saying, for even if we were to accept that rules applied universally is the contractarian approach really telling us about morality? No! Even if something benefits me that may not the reason why I do it and definitely not the reason it is moral. An absolutist would say that rules are moral in themselves, regardless of the time or society in which they agreed. Locke develops the idea that there need be no actual agreement by saying that it is a tactic agreement. This means that a person who seeks to reap the benefits of society implicitly agrees to social contract and if I dont then I am free to leave. However am I really free to leave? It would not seem so. To leave, I would most likely have to leave this would not only mean having a passport to go to a different country, which would have its own set of rules but meaning that to get to the airport I would have to abide by the road rules lest I wish to be arrested. Even if Hobbes is correct in saying that there is no actual contract, we are left with why should we honour the agreement? Indeed, if we are self-interested as Hobbes says then surely when the time came, we would act in a self-interest way? This view can be illustrated by Ian McEwans Enduring Love; there is a hot air balloon and in the basket lays a child there is a sudden gust and the balloon starts it flight. Five men grab onto the rope of the balloon, alas there is another gust and if all five men carry on holding on then the child will be saved. This did not happen. All but one, were left clinging on to the rope. Whats even more so apparent is that if I am sure that I will get away with doing something immoral, why shouldnt I do it? If I knew I wasnt going to be caught stealing money then it would be in my self-interest to steal it. Hobbes answer to the aforementioned question is a Sovereign. This means that there is someone to enforce the law (the terms of the contract). By doing this, it would show that when acting against the contract and giving primacy to self-interest, it would not be in our long term self-interest to do so. However this still doesnt answer the question as to why someone who knows they will not get caught should be moral. Indeed, there are many people who are criminals and it is only found out after they have died. Also, there seems to be a different argument put forward by David Gauthier who argues that to there is no need for a sovereign because those of us who have dispositions to altruism, will in the long term have more benefits than those who are shot-sightedly self-interested. This view is strong in the sense that it shows that human beings are genuinely altruistic with a purpose of doing so and thus not having an over pessimistic view of humans (thus the lesser need for a sovereign). There are further problems with the social contract approach. When a terrorist has a hostage, he can use the hostage to dictate the terms of an agreement. This means that despite this being unfair, or even immoral, he can ask for however million pounds and for him to be pardoned of his act. This is obviously immoral and wrong. This situation is analogous to the state of nature period and someone strong dictating the terms which are not moral such as making all children workers. Furthermore, we could take the view of Marx and Thrasymacus (from Platos Republic) who say that the social contract is a means of social control by the minority. This means that the powerful and rich peoples interests can be carried out under the veil of morality. An example is the respect for property which, by no coincidence, is what the ruling class have. This means that the weak can be exploited and the rulers can maintain their position. We can criticise Marx for not taking into account that people do not steal because they do not want to offend the ruling class but this is not what Marx is trying to say. Indeed, what he is saying is that this is the correct reason why people do not do such things and through instruments such as religion and education (throughout history) they have been taught these rules and regulations. However John Rawls argues in his Theory of Justice that to counter this, we must decide the terms under a veil of ignorance in which nobody is certain for their position and so everyone will be fighting for minority rights in case they are within that minority; nothing is assured! If we posit Hobbes view as truth then we also find ourselves holding a pessimistic view of life for we have ample opportunity to break the rules of the contract yet we do not. If we were to hold Hobbes view societies would long be over because we could no longer trust people because they would take such selfish actions. To say that people dont mug each other in fear of being caught is not plausible. Surely the actions of a mother or a carer in the slums seem to show that we do not act just for self-interest. Further, is Hobbes really giving an accurate account of morality? We can indeed have a contract but is the only reason we do not break it because we fear the courts? Surely this isnt morality but a preference of prudence in an action but this view does not correlate with what we express. If someone were to say Stealing is wrong, they do not mean that it is better if you dont because it is more sensible, they mean it is a morally irreprehensible action. Hobbes view is also put under fire by alternative views, Richard Dawkins argues that altruistic behaviour can lead to evolutionary success and is thus embedded in our genes. There was never a conventional agreement rather because it is mutually advantage behaviour helps our evolutionary success, humans do it. So it is not because it is mutually advantageous that we choose to do it but we do it because it is advantageous and has helped us reach this stage. This, of course, is not the only alternative view others view moral as what the Bible says or even the Quran. We could even take the utilitarian approach and say that what is moral is the thing that obtains the greatest number of peoples happiness. To take this view is, as said, to ignore every instance of altruism. However what about blatant acts of altruism? The egoist could say that subconsciously we gain self-gratification from doing right things. However, again, it does not follow that I am doing these things because I want self-gratification. In the case of Mother Teresa, it is not plausible that she only did those things because she wanted self-satisfaction. As the egoist claims that everything is in some way selfish, it negate the idea of selfish and selfless as it distorts the distinction and leaves nothing but motives which is not a direct accurate description of the world. Thus to conclude, to hold the view that morality is defined, described and prescribed by a social contract ultimately fails. Alternative ideas not only, in some cases, have scientific backing but also have a more accurate representation of the real world. The view is both pessimistic and would lead to the powerful being on top and the weak being exploited. Thus we must conclude as Hume did and say that there is not historically validity (among other things) to this claim.

industrial revolution Essay -- essays research papers

What factors helped to promote America’s huge industrial growth during the period from 1860-1900? America had a huge industrial revolution in the late 1800†s. Many changes happened to our great nation, which factored into this. The evidence clearly shows that advancements in new technology, a large wave of immigrants into our country and new views of our government, helped to promote America’s huge industrial growth from the period of 1860-1900. Advancements in new technology clearly promoted the industrial growth of the United States. The new technologies allowed business owners to reduce labor in the movement of materials from one point to the other. This occurred by using the new technology of railroads and machinery. Business owners used the railroads to transport their finished product and raw materials around the country more efficiently, which enabled businesses to expand. The business owners were now able to use machines for lifting materials from one floor to another and to use conveyer belts to move materials around on an assembly line. The use of machines is evident because the graph in document 5 clearly shows that American industrial and agricultural power sources between 1850 and 1900 changed. This is evident because in 1850, only 13% human power and 35% water and coal power was used, but in 1900 a mere 5% human power and a whopping 73% water and coal power was used. The use of machines more than doubled over t he course from 1850-1900, and the human output de...

Human Migration Essay

Human migration is the movement by people from one place to another with the intention of settling temporarily or permanently in the new location. The movement is typically over long distances and from one country to another, but internal migration is also possible. Migration may be individuals, family units or in large groups. Immigration is the movement of people into a country to which they are not native in order to settle there, especially as permanent residents or future citizens. Immigrants are motivated to leave their native countries for a variety of reasons, including a lack of local access to resources, a desire for economic prosperity, family re-unification, escape from prejudice, conflict or natural disaster, or simply the wish to change one’s surroundings. 1. Build background about human migration and types of migration. Explain to students that human migration is the movement of people from one place in the world to another. Ask: What are some different types of human movements? Then tell students that people move for many reasons, and that types of human migration include: †¢internal migration: moving within a state, country, or continent †¢external migration: moving to a different state, country, or continent †¢emigration: leaving one country to move to another †¢immigration: moving into a new country †¢return migration: moving back to where you came from †¢seasonal migration: moving with each season or in response to labor or climate conditions 2. Discuss people who migrate. Tell students that people who migrate fall into several categories: †¢An emigrant is a person who is leaving one country to live in another. †¢An immigrant is a person who is entering a country from another to make a new home. †¢A refugee is a person who has moved to a new country because of a problem in their former home Have students provide specific examples of each to demonstrate understanding of the differences between the three terms. 3. Brainstorm reasons for migrating. Ask: Why do people move? What forces do you think drive human migration? Then explain to students that people move for many reasons and that those reasons are called push factors and pull factors. Tell students that push factors include leaving a place because of a problem, such as a food shortage, war, or flood. Tell students that pull factors include moving to a place because of something good, such as a nicer climate, more job opportunities, or a better food supply. Ask: What effect does a region’s economy; climate, politics, and culture have on migration to and from the area? Have students brainstorm additional reasons for migrating, such as displacement by a natural disaster, lack of natural resources, the state of an economy, and more. The relatively permanent movement of people across territorial boundaries is referred to as in migration and out-migration, or immigration and emigration when the boundaries crossed are international. The place of in-migration or immigration is called the receiver population, and the place of out-migration or emigration is called the sender population. There are two basic types of migration studied by demographers: 1.Internal migration. This refers to a change of residence within national boundaries, such as between states, provinces, cities, or municipalities. An internal migrant is someone who moves to a different administrative territory. 2.International migration. This refers to change of residence over national boundaries. An international migrant is someone who moves to a different country. International migrants are further classified as legal immigrants, illegal immigrants, and refugees. Legal immigrants are those who moved with the legal permission of the receiver nation, illegal immigrants are those who moved without legal permission, and refugees are those crossed an international boundary to escape persecution. Jay Weinstein and Vijayan Pillai (2001) denote a third classification: forced migration. Forced migration exists when a person is moved against their will (slaves), or when the move is initiated because of external factors (natural disaster or civil war). The distinction between internal and international migration is crucial because they happen for different reasons. Because structural barriers are more likely to impede the mobility of a potential international migrant than an internal migrant—international migration involves more administrative procedures, greater expense, and more difficulties associated  with obtaining employment, accessing state services, learning a new language, and the like—the motivations behind international migration are usually stronger than those behind internal migration (Weeks 1999). Why do people migrate? People have moved from their home countries for centuries, for all sorts of reasons. Some are drawn to new places by ‘pull ‘ factors, others find it difficult to remain where they are and migrate because of ‘push’ factors. These have contributed to the recent movement of people here but are also the reason why people from here have emigrated to other countries. Over 80 million people in the world have Irish blood; 36.5 million US residents claimed Irish ancestry in 2007. Historically some were transported or sold into slavery or left because of poverty, hunger, persecution, discrimination, civil war, unemployment and, more recently, simply for education and better jobs. Migrant numbers have risen rapidly in the last decade. In 2013 there were thought to be over 230 million international migrants. Pull Factors Migrants are drawn increasingly to countries such as the UK and Ireland by the following factors: †¢Developed countries, or industrialised city areas within countries, draw labour from countries or areas where incomes are lower. †¢International transport has never been easier and is cheaper than ever, relative to incomes. †¢The telephone and internet make it easier to access information. †¢Falling birth rates in developed countries contribute to labour shortages and skills gaps. †¢Extra people are required when there is rapid economic expansion. †¢People are drawn to stable democracies where human rights and religious freedoms are more likely to be respected. †¢Many people in other parts of the world speak English. †¢Young people move in order to get better jobs or improve their qualifications, including their language skills. Push Factors Negative factors at home add to the reasons why people feel compelled to move. †¢Lack of prospects for career advancement †¢Poverty and low incomes †¢High unemployment rates †¢Persecution and poor human rights †¢Internal conflict and war †¢Natural disasters, climate change and famine THE IMMIGRATION The immigration, as a decision made by a person is an act that occurs, because of some factors especially in the under developed countries and the most important causes or reasons are mainly social reasons, politic reasons and economic reasons. For the first reason which is the social one , the underdeveloped countries know and suffer from crisis at the economic level, this factor leads the people to immigrates abroad in order togain money , and find a work. Also, poverty leads many people and pushes them to search for a work and gain money to solve their problems and afford their needs, but this isn’t available or easy to reach in their home country, so that they choose to travel abroad where the work is available and the cost of living isn’t rising, and where they can improve their social situation. For the second reason, which is politic, and as we know, in some countries especially the underdeveloped one there is some civil wars between the citizenship, this fact means that there is no peace in that country and automatically we know that when there is no peace there is no normal life, because when the war start it damaged anything and everyone who is in front of it, and because of all that some people choose to travel abroad and avoid any trouble caused by the war. At least, and for the third reason, which is the economic one, the most underdeveloped countries suffer from the low salaries that the workers get, which push many of them to think of the immigration. Also, those countries don’t afford for all the people enough jobs especially for the younger’s that are considered as new comers to the job market where they shocked when they discover that there isn’t enough jobs for them and so that their decision will be surely to travel abroad or to immigrate definitively . But the most dangerous problem is that some  younger’s travel even if they have high degrees in different domains and this will leads those countries to fall in the problem of BRAIN DRAIN, so that their immigration could be a great loss for their countries, especially in a time where there countries are in a great need for their knowledge. Finally, and in my opinion I think that every under country must afford enough jobs, especially for the Youngers those that are considered as the future of the country, and try to reduce the social problems and then stop the immigration.

Gender Inequality The United States - 939 Words

Gender inequality has been an issue in the United States of America since the very founding of the country. Many believe that the sexes are equal in the United States of today because nearly a hundred years ago women gained the right to vote but this was not the only hurdle we needed to surmount. Gender inequality is alive and thriving even today, and although this is definitely not the only issue American women face today, it can be seen in something called the wage gap. It is commonly known that the average woman makes 77 cents to a man’s dollar, but this only applies to white women. The gap increases more and more for women of color. The median black woman earns 65.1% of what the median white man earns hourly, and the median Hispanic woman earns 58.9% as much, (Davis). The Economic Policy Institute found some other interesting facts in their search for information on the wage gap and how to close it. They found that the gender wage gap exists at â€Å"every decile in the w age distribution, at every level of educational attainment, and in the majority of occupations†. They say that if we had closed the gender wage gap and had wages grown in line with productivity from 1979-2014, which they did not, the hourly wages of the median woman could be over 70 percent higher today—$26.04 instead of $15.21. Building on this, they also found that only, â€Å"About 16 percent ($1.69) of the disparity is explained by gender inequality, 49.1 percent ($5.32) is explained by overall inequalityShow MoreRelatedGender Inequality Of The United States1363 Words   |  6 Pagesof color, you’re going to be underpaid, so there’s really no point,† Daniel recalled (â€Å"Career and Workplace† 4). A future law graduate was told to throw away her dreams in regards to gender inequality. A girl named Reshma Daniel had to give up what she loved most because of a situation regarding both her race and gender. Reshma Daniel’s parents moved to America from India with just a couple dollars. Her parents wanted their children to live the Amer ican life. For Daniel, that simply meant law schoolRead MoreGender Inequality Within The United States1531 Words   |  7 Pageswe can see there is a trend implicates that the gender roles are slowly starting to change but the gender stereotype still have stayed firmly over the years in North America even though people are now more aware of the problem of gender inequality. In North America, gender roles between women and men are now being shared more equally in workspace due to the feminism movements and higher literacy level of women, but there are still gender inequality existing in our society. Feminism movements haveRead MoreGender Inequality Within The United States1701 Words   |  7 PagesGender has had a repeating effect on the choice of careers for people all throughout the United States. In history, it is taught that males dominated women in many careers, while women dominated males in only a few other minor positions. Males had an upper hand over women in engineering and in the military. One of the reasons males dominated was the idea of dominance over women has been passed down for centuries. It was never common for a women to be an engineer of a home or anything that wasn’tRead MoreGender Inequality Within The United States1879 Words   |  8 Pagesand colonization has evolved, gender in the United States has been constructed in a manner that is unknown in other countries. Our society has made different stereotypes for certain sexes. It is socially impossible to not make a collation between sex and gender in the United States. Women are viewed the same in the professional world and in the home life perspective. All roles played by women are considered to be inadequate or insignificant compared to men. Gender characteristics, such as masculinityRead MoreGender Inequality During The United States1971 Words   |  8 PagesCorona 1 Yailin Corona Honors English 11-4 Junior Research Paper 3 March 2016 Gender Inequality in the U.S. For years, women have been viewed as weak, indecisive, and subjective. Women have become more empowered since their suffrage and earning their rights. Although, they have their rights, women are not equal to men in today’s society because of unequal pay and discrimination. The pay between the two gender in recent college graduates and stabilized jobs opt towards males. Women are discriminatedRead MoreGender Inequality Within The United States2702 Words   |  11 PagesGender Inequality In the United States there are many human equal rights for women but they are insufficient to create equality. Despite of many equality rules gender inequality still exists and that’s the fact. In history women were not allowed to study or work. In modern world women are achieving education goals and also working. Does that mean women are getting equal treatments? The answer is no, women are not treated as equally as men. The graduation rates for women are higher then men, butRead MoreGender Inequality Within The United States1686 Words   |  7 PagesThere have been many advances in society, especially for women despite these advancements, there continues to be inequalities in sexual â€Å"equality† .Why does a wage difference exists between men and women? Are employers being sexist? Sexism has been a problem since the beginning of mankind. Women have struggled to achieve equality with men. The male dominated culture has led the female gender to become the â€Å"wea ker sex†. This discrimination, of course, based on the stereotype that women should be stayRead MoreGender Inequality Within The United States1410 Words   |  6 PagesEquality Among Gender Both within and across different cultures we find great consistency in standards of desirable gender-role behavior. Males are expected to be independent, assertive, and competitive; females are expected to be more passive, sensitive, and supportive. These beliefs have changed over the past twenty years within the United States and apparently around the world as well. Therefore, modern society has been trying for the past decade to eliminate all of these stereotypes and doubleRead MoreGender Inequality Within The United States Of The English Department Of Ku.881 Words   |  4 PagesIn today s society we have gender inequality without us even knowing we are doing it, because it is how we are all raised. From when a lot of us were younger we have seen everyone else â€Å" doing gender† so we have picked up on it.By doing gender we create different levels that men and women are put on. These levels are not natural they are man made. The culture we are raised in assigns and crea tes for us the different attributes and behaviors. Since we are aware of the expectations that are held overRead MoreGender Inequality : A Good Understanding Of The Social Inequality Essay1487 Words   |  6 PagesAs a female college student I feel the necessity to have a good understanding of the social inequalities around me. Although, women have socially grown with more power over the years, it is not enough to equalize with the men. For example, the pay gap difference between men and women for not having the â€Å"testosterone bonus† even though the same education and qualifications are present. I hope that over time I will be able to experience a change and have the same equal rights as men because I feel