Human Nature and the Social Order

849 Words2 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The nature of human nature

Human nature is not simply a measure of our human tendencies. It is both individual and collective. It does not explain why events happen. Instead, it explains the subconscious of each individual in the instant that events happen. The social order that best fits human nature is one where the informed opinions of everyone creates decisions and causes action. Madison’s argument for and against factions, Aristotle’s idea of ultimate happiness, and Locke’s concept of popular government and human rights all offer a significant component to the larger concept that is human nature. While some may argue that we will only fully understand human nature when we are met with death, still we can begin to capture a slight understanding to what governs human nature and the political order that helps it grow.
Initially, when we read James Madison we learn the nature of factions. Factions play an important role in human nature because they are vessels of opinions. The opinion of one individual is not enough to cause change. Factions solve this by uniting people with similar opinions and allowing them to urge for change. Madison realized the unrelenting force of a faction left to grow without restraint. They were dangerous because they were often violent and disruptive often being called the “weakness of popular government”. At worst, they lead to civil war and at the least the inhibited the execution of public policy. While he acknowledge that the easiest way to remove a faction was to destroy their liberties, he knew that this would mean to declare a war on human nature. He also understood that removing their liberty would mean removing the liberty of others, which he did not want. Instead, he suggested controlling the effects of majority faction...

... middle of paper ...

... have seen human nature grow and change. Because human nature is dynamic, we must observe it throughout history. Human nature grows through factions, it is protected through just popular government and its future is ensured through the ultimate good. We are living in human nature, we are human nature, and because of this we are also changing. We change as the ideas and opinions of the world change. Through death, we may come to fully understand human nature but only through living will we use the power of our human nature to create the just world of tomorrow.

Works Cited

Aristotle, and Joe Sachs. Nicomachean Ethics. Newbury, MA: Focus Pub./R. Pullins, 2002. Print.

Locke, John, and Thomas Preston Peardon. The Second Treatise of
Government. New York: Liberal Arts, 1952. Print.

Madison, James. The Federalist: No. 10. Milwaukee: Council on Urban Life, 1975. Print.

Show More
Related

  • Fahrenheit 451 Federalist 10 Analysis

    709 Words  | 2 Pages

    Madison believed the ways to eliminate factions by removing its causes and to control the effects. Even though factions cannot simply be eliminated, Madison believed that the destruction of liberty or to give every individual the same opinion. Direct democracy is not strong enough to protect its personnel, property rights, and have been characterized by conflict. It is surprising, but Madison recommended a strong and large Republic. He believed that there would be more factions, but much weaker than in small, direct democracies where it would be easier to consolidate stronger factions. Madison concluded his argument by saying, “according to the degree of ple...

    Read More

  • Federalist 10 Pros And Cons

    614 Words  | 2 Pages

    This passage places emphasis on one of the three arguments James Madison makes in Federalist 10. Madison explicates the deficit of factions specifically factions that could cause nothing but “mischief” for the United States. In this particular passage, he explains how factions are inevitable in our country, however, controlling the effect of factions would diminish their “mischievous impact.” Thus, prohibiting factions assists in reducing the probability of “[a] weaker party or an obnoxious individual” from gaining power over the minority. These smaller factions that Madison hopes to avoid are a direct result of “pure democracy” that he accounts as have “general[ly]…short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.” Therefore, this particular fragment from federalist 10 serves as the precedent to the introduction of a mixed Constitution of a democracy and republic, in this case, a large republic.

    Read More

  • Analysis Of The New Federal Constitution A Radical Experiment

    809 Words  | 2 Pages

    He discusses how Madison noticed the problem of each of the 134 states having its own agenda. Madison even thought that people were interested in their local politics. They don’t think of the whole state or even the whole country (Wood, 2012). He wanted to change this and create a stronger government that would override certain state powers like money printing and the ability to pass tariffs. He suggested that democracy was not a solution, but a problem (Wood, 2012). Basically, on a state level, he wanted to elevate decision making to limit democracy which was actually causing more harm than

    Read More

  • The Federalist No.'s 10 and 51

    433 Words  | 1 Pages

    The crucial issue of Madison’s time was the right of the people. The people should be involved in their government, and know about how their government can work with them.

    Read More

  • James Madison As A Hero Essay

    552 Words  | 2 Pages

    As a leader Madison legitimately wanted the best for the American people. As he grew into a politician of authority, he did the best he could at the time to accomplish what the people as a nation needed to be able to thrive for years on after with efforts towards the “Constitution,” “Bill of Rights”, and “Federalist Papers”. All of which are still effective today in the United States Government. James Madison not only wanted the best for his people, he loved what he was doing as well. From a young age he was interested in the political debates over independence. He continued and rose up the ladder in his career because of his passion for what he did and the care he put in his work knowing it will benefit many people other than

    Read More

  • Factions and the Constitution

    419 Words  | 1 Pages

    In Madison's Federalist 10, it is evident that he was not in favor of the formation of factions. He states, "…The public good is often disregarded in the conflicts of rival parties…" Madison made the point that the dangers of factions can only be limited by controlling its effects. He recognized that in order to abolish political parties from the government completely, liberty would have to be abolished or limited as well. For this reason, the government had to accept political parties, but it did not have to incorporate them into being a major part of the government. He says that the inclination to form factions is inherent, however the parties effectiveness can be regulated. If the party is not majority than it can be controlled by majority vote. Madison believed that in the government established by the Constitution, political parties were to be tolerated and checked by the government, however the parties were never to control the government. Madison was absolutely convinced that parties were unhealthy to the government, but his basic point was to control parties as to prevent them from being dangerous.

    Read More

  • Federalist #10

    935 Words  | 2 Pages

    To Madison, there are only two ways to control a faction: one, to remove its causes and the second to control its effects. The first is impossible. There are only two ways to remove the causes of a faction: destroy liberty or give every citizen the same opinions, passions, and interests. Destroying liberty is a "cure worse then the disease itself," and the second is impracticable. The causes of factions are thus part of the nature of man and we must deal with their effects and accept their existence.

    Read More

  • Federalists and Anti-Federalists

    1659 Words  | 4 Pages

    ...he other hand, Madison discusses the topic of liberty in that it is what fuels factions. He says that removing liberty is one of the only ways to destroy a faction. He proceeds to state that this is not probable, and that factions can not be destroyed, but we must control their consequences in order to have a stable government. Madison believes that the Constitution preserves man's liberty by fairly representing them in a central government.

    Read More

  • The Dangers Of Factionalism In Canada

    1298 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Federalist Paper Number 10, Madison sees Factions as being inevitable. Humans hold differing opinions and are all living under different circumstances, and are likely to group together with those most like themselves. Some groups of people will attempt to work together to benefit themselves even if it goes against public interests and even if it infringes upon the rights of others. In the Federalist Paper Number 10, Madison feared that Factions could be detrimental to the common good and in order to minimize the effects and control the effects of Factions, the best form of government would be a large republic. According to Madison, to minimize the negative consequences of Factions, they must either be controlled or the causes of Factions must be removed. Since he describes the causes of Factions being the different interests and living conditions between individuals, it can be argued that this solution is not very feasible. It would be impossible to make sure every single person makes the same amount of money, has the same goals, and even goes through similar life experiences. The greatest source of Factions, the deepest and biggest cause of Factions, according to Madison, is the unequal distribution of property. The acquisition of property or lack of property creates class divisions the foster differing interests. Since it is not possible to

    Read More

  • James Madison's View of Factionalism

    1339 Words  | 3 Pages

    The dangers of faction can somewhat outweigh the good. The framers of the American Constitution feared the power that could possibly come about by organized interest groups. Madison wrote "The public good is disregarded in the conflict of rival factions…citizens…who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adverse to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community." However, the framers believed that interest groups thrived because of freedom, the same privilege that Americans utilize to express their views. Madison saw direct democracy as a danger to individual rights and advocated a representative democracy to protect individual liberty, and the general public from the effects of such inequality in society. Madison says "A pure democracy can admit no cure for the mischief's of faction. A common passion or interest will be felt by a majority…Hence it is, that democracies have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have, in general, been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths."

    Read More

  • Unequal Distribution Of Property And Factions

    1079 Words  | 3 Pages

    In conclusion, Madison thinks the human nature is ambitious, and the fixed outcome of human ambitions is people create factions to promote their own interests. In the case of preventing corrupt or mischief by factions, he believes majority and pure democracy is not a solution. The method he advocated is a large republic with checking system. He converts human ambition to provide internal checks and balances in government. His point of view stimulated the approval of the proposal of the United States Constitution.

    Read More

  • Pluralism

    1378 Words  | 3 Pages

    In Federalist No. 10, James Madison stresses that “measures are too often decided, not according to the rules of justice and the rights of the minor party, but by the superior force of an interested and overbearing majority.” Madison philosophized that a large republic, composed of numerous factions capable of competing with each other and the majority must exist in order to avoid tyranny of majority rule.# When Federalist No. 10 was published, the concept of pluralism was not widely used. However, the political theory that is the foundation for United States government was the influential force behind pluralism and its doctrines.

    Read More

  • Human Nature and Proper Order

    1724 Words  | 4 Pages

    Proper Order in Confucianism and as taught primarily by Mencius, the Chinese philosopher, is the conceptual theory that instructs how people can reach their highest potential of moral and material well being embodied in Mencius' conception of human nature. The theory of proper order is the primary and philosophical means to that end. Although proper order may seem in many ways philosophically abstract, Mencius' teachings of proper order in history have had lasting and tangible effects on modern East Asian politics and its relationship between the state and society, and even on a narrower level of the individual and community. In fact, the theory of proper order starts first at the individual level and from there flourishes to create a positive rippling effect throughout all of society. This profound theory and its ideals is credited with developing a social society in East Asia which acknowledges the great potential of each of its citizens, but still aspires to consider the effects of individual actions on the common good and not to just ignore the interests of society as a whole. This has helped guide East Asia through its long and colorful history and has helped to shape it into the political and economic powerhouse that it is today. But where exactly did such a significant theory which has helped to define an entire society come from? What exactly is proper order, how can we create it, and why is it needed to achieve Mencius' human nature? Most of these questions can be answered in explaining the fundamental virtue that all humans have according to Mencius, our humaneness defined in human nature.

    Read More

  • Hobbes's Theory Of Political Nature And The Theories Of Human Nature

    1286 Words  | 3 Pages

    Theories of human nature, as the term would ever so subtly suggest, are at best only individual assertions of the fundamental and intrinsic compositions of mankind, and should be taken as such. Indeed it can be said that these assertions are both many and widespread, and yet too it can be said that there are a select few assertions of the nature of man that rise above others when measured by historical persistence, renown, and overall applicability. These eclectic discourses on the true nature of man have often figured largely in theories of political science, typically functioning as foundational structures to broader claims and arguments. The diversification of these ideological assertions, then, would explain the existence of varying theories

    Read More

  • What Is The Metaphysical Ground Of Rob Geis Philosophy

    1986 Words  | 4 Pages

    ... best political system has caused dispute between mankind in which the pursuit of the answer turned our very own kind against one another. The search for the answer could not have pushed us further away from the initial question. The question being what is the best way to treat one another on the largest known scale? It seems that although we are able to pursue such important questions, our animalistic instincts get in the way of the answers. We find ourselves defensive and skeptical of each other’s actions and thought. There must be a push in better understanding of happiness, comfort, and virtue, in alignment with every human. Once humans can understand one another as equals of the same wants and needs, self-reflection of one’s intentions, and the pondering of others intentions will draw parallel, without doubt, and create once again innovation of thought.

    Read More

More about Human Nature and the Social Order

Open Document