Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Collectivism vs individualism easy
Case of individualism versus collectivism
Individualism vs collectivism social theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Collectivism vs individualism easy
The debate over individualism and collectivism has been the fundamental conflict both in political philosophy and in ethics. Philosophers such as Ayn Rand think that human beings are fundamentally individuals, and that everyone exists for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. But it is very rare for one to live completely alone by himself. The entire human race would not be able to evolve and reproduce, if humans were individualistic in nature, and each individual needs some form of support from group to enhance its own odds of surviving. Humans naturally are in need of each other to survive, to reproduce, and to protect their offspring. Such needs are innately built into every human being, and …show more content…
Based on Rawls’s definition of social cooperation as something achievable for persons with certain moral capacities and sense of justice, Kittay’s understanding of moral ethics emphasized on sense of attachment, empathetic attention to others’ needs and responsiveness to those needs. Such attachment and the capacity to respond to vulnerability, show that humans are by nature not individualistic, but collaborative. Kittay also pointed out the fact that everyone may become dependent and may require support from others at that point. Such understanding, and the need to be assured that if we become dependent we would be taken care of, ought to be acknowledged when we discuss moral ethics of human nature. Women for example, make sacrifices on their maternal roles to provide care, and the ability to care have been politically fought for in many countries, as people widely value the dependency relationships between human …show more content…
Kittay’s work detailing the dependency relationship explains that human rely on each other; Aristotle’s work conveys that human forms household for economical interest; and Marx’s work implied that humans are eventually one classless society with best economical benefits for all. Whether or not being members in community is the best way to live for every human is still debatable, but it is the only choice that humans all made by
Ayn Rand's classic story of one man's desire to become an individual in a nameless society presents a compelling refutation of collectivism in all forms. The hero, labeled "Equality 7-2521" by the State, chooses to challenge conventional authority as he learns the joys of experimentation and discovery, the ecstasy of human love, the challenge and fairness of liberty, and the happiness of self-interest. Equality 7-2521 writes three unique phrases in his journal: 1. "My happiness needs no higher aim to vindicate it. My happiness is not the means to an end. It is the end.", 2. "We know that we are evil, but there is no will in us and no power to resist it.", 3. "The word 'We' . . . must never be placed first within man's soul.". These phrases will be discussed individually in the remainder of this essay.
In the article “Individual Autonomy and Social Structure”, Dorothy Lee talks about individual autonomy. She goes through the topic by examining different groups such as; the Wintu Indians of California, the Sikh family, the Navaho Indians of Arizona and New Mexico, and the Chinese culture. All of these different groups and societies give personal freedom to the individuals regardless of age groups. The example of Navaho Indians is used by Lee to demonstrate how “personal autonomy is supported by the cultural framework” (Lee, 1959, p.5). She points out the individual autonomy of non-western societies to the individuality of western society. One group gives full independence to an individual while the other does not and puts restrictions in place through some form. She states “...in a heterogeneous society such as ours, and in an era of induced change and speeded temp of living, it has been difficult to implement this tenet in the everyday details of living” (Lee, 1959, p.5). She points out the fast living pace of western society, where the personal autonomy given from the other cultures is lacking.
In a society, at what point does uniting to benefit the greater good suppress one’s right to possess individuality? The social and political construct of utmost unity is called collectivism, or the practice of emphasizing a whole picture rather than each individual component. The common theme of collectivism versus individualism is prevalent within the novel Anthem by Ayn Rand, wherein the individual motivations of the members of society are suppressed without their knowledge. While contributing to the greater good may have its appeal, one must learn that for this to be possible, individual sacrifices are necessary. The ultimately collectivist society depicted in Anthem is justified by its rulers through ideas of
The word collectivism often makes people cringe. Overall, there is a general fear of not being able to make personal decisions in America. According to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, collectivism can be defined as; emphasis on collective rather than individual action or identity (“Collectivism”). In Anthem, Ayn Rand describes an extreme collectivist society. Although Anthem’s society seems extremely surreal, aspects of its collectivist society closely mirror today’s society.
Virginia Held brings up many criticisms of traditional ethical theories in her essay. The ethics of care can be considered as a suitable substitution for other widely accepted ethical theories such as Kantian ethics. The ethics of care recognizes the importance of interpersonal relationships, especially those within the family unit. All people need care at some point during their life, be it at birth or old age. Caring for people that can not provide sufficient care for themselves is a fundamental part of a moral society. Ethical theories based on the importance of a rational and independent individual excludes the importance of interpersonal reliance.
The art of collectivism has been instilled in our minds since the very beginnings of society. For instance, in the Bible, Jesus Christ himself gave up his life on the cross for the well-being of those around him. Other verses in the bible contribute to the same idea that you should treat everyone as your family and do for them as you would want done unto yourself. “You shall not hate your brother in your heart, but you shall reason frankly with your neighbor, lest you incur sin because o...
It is human nature to see those who are different and group them into distinct categories. The distinction of Individualism versus Collectivism is one that is currently being studied extensively. On one side, individualism sees individuals as the fundamental unit of a society. Individuals are supposed to be unique, independent, and most importantly, willing to put their own interests above all others. On the other hand, collectivism views the basic building block of society as social groups, stressing the interpersonal bonds between people. Collectivist values dictate that group goals and values have higher precedence than an individual’s. Due to the seemingly polar opposite nature of these ideologies, it is inevitable that they will be compared to see which is more beneficial to the country and its people. Some might point to the success of the US, an extremely individualistic country, in support of individualistic values. They will point to the freedom of choice and diversity that individualism boasts of. Others stress the flaws of the US in response, and while both sides do have their truths, the costs that come with individualistic values are too great to be ignored. Highly individualistic attitudes have caused many large scale problems which have long been identified as difficult to resolve issues. These problems include, but are not limited to, promoting aggressive acts, creating an obsession with social power, and allowing a system of injustice to be born.
Hypothesis: “We hypothesize that the performance of individual members in such situations is likely to be highest when the members hold both individualist and collectivist orientations toward their work” (Hollenbeck, Humphrey, Meyer, Wagner, 2012, pg. 947).
The idea of Individualism can be traced all the way back to England before America’s existence. As we know, individualism has been interpreted in many forms throughout history. The 19th century is no different, taking hold of its own idea of individualism, called transcendentalism. Transcendentalism suggests freedom should not be confined to those focused on money and superficial gains. Instead, people should depend on no one but themselves. This movement focused on “greater individualism against conformity” (Corbett et al.). Heavily influenced by the Romantic period, transcendentalism adopted the belief that reason was more important than logic as Benjamin Franklin has believed. Reason must also include unique emotion and spirit (Corbett et
I never even thought about this word “individualism” before I came to America. Instead of collective, normal is the way I considered as my culture, and for American culture, I would say they are selfish and unkindly sometimes back then. However, after my 2-year study here and all the research I’ve been read for this paper, now I say that neither individualism nor collectivism is purely bad or good.
In “The problem of Poverty” Kuyper has the view that we all need God in our lives. We cannot survive on our own. In contrast, in “The Communist Manifesto” Marx believes that socialism is the fix for our problem. He thinks that we should all have equal authority and power of our own lives. We should not trust anyone but ourselves to solve the problem. Throughout this paper, we are going to analyze the solutions that Kuyper and Marx suggest to fix our society. First we will look at them separately and then see where they agree and disagree. Both have strong opinions on how to fix the social crisis.
Before taking this class, my understanding between each individual and the whole society is that every individuals as the gear are connected together to become a society like a machine. That is, human beings build the society. However, the class gave me bigger view of the relationship between the people and the society. Discussing about the relationship between me and the broader social world is based on how all human beings and the broader social world effect together. Thus, I am going to show my understanding from the class and reading about the interaction between each individual and the whole society.
“Altruism — the sacrifice of self to others. This tied man irrevocably to other men and left him nothing but a choice of pain: his own pain borne for the sake of others or pain inflicted upon others for the sake of self.” This dramatic definition of altruism, from The Soul of an Individualist by Ayn Rand, provides a backdrop for similar ideologies. Along the same philosophical vein, one can examine the principles of collectivism, a way of life that puts priority on a group instead of a single member. Individualism, on the other hand, is the complete rejection of these two ideas and a way of thinking that stresses living on one’s own terms instead of being dictated to by a group. As shown
The oldest social law of responsibility to oneself has made a comeback in modern times with a twist. Jean-Jacques Rousseau stated, “The oldest of all societies, and the only natural one, is that of the family; yet children remain tied to their father by nature only so long as they need him for their preservation.” (Rousseau). As of now that twist to be explained has expanded into a preservation bubble more so for the individual than one’s own family. The twist is not a new concept, but it is “Gesellschaft” that becomes the dominant cancer that erodes the very ideal of community.
On chapter 4 on the textbook, the author explains, “culture provides a member of a society with a common bond, a sense that we see certain facets of society in similar ways. We are living together at all depends on the fact that members of a society share a certain amount of cultural knowledge (Ch4, 132). Individualism and collectivism contribute greatly to the dimension of culture. For example, how many members of the culture define themselves apart from their group memberships. In individualist cultures, people are expected to develop and display their individual personalities and to choose their own affiliations. In collectivist cultures, people are defined and act mostly as a member of a long-term group, such as the family, a religious group, an age cohort, a town, or a profession, among others. This dimension was found to move towards the individualist end of the spectrum with increasing