Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Individualism vs collectivism
Individualism over collectivism in modern day
Global warming negative effects
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Individualism vs collectivism
Source one demonstrates and embraces the perspective of a collectivist. The speaker of the source, Chief Seattle, a prominent leader of the Native American tribes, represents his collective point of view of how each and every one of us are connected illustrating the “web of life”. His statement indicates his primary focus of how humans are creatures that needs to be dependent on others in order to survive. This view is placed on the left side on the political spectrum with the assumptions that all people are created equal where they value the goals of the group and the common good over the individual goals and rights. The way he stated that, “whatever we do to the web, we do to ourselves”, strongly expressed a collective perspective and that the actions of an individual will not only affect himself/herself, but others as well. An example would be global warming, it will not only affect the countries that create pollutions, but everyone else is also involved and affected in this issue. People may call it the ‘butterfly effect’, where it is a scientific theory that describes how one s...
In conclusion, Carr and Gladwell’s essays have proven that the internet positive effects are outweighed by its negative effects. Carr has found he is unable to finish a full text anymore or concentrate. He thinks that the internet has taken our natural intelligence and turned it into artificial intelligence. Gladwell discusses how nowadays, social activism doesn’t have the same risk or impact as former revolutions such as the Civil Rights Movement. The internet is mostly based on weak ties based among people who do not truly know each other and would not risk their lives for their
He makes a point of how American’s place an extreme emphasis on “lineal order”, we take pride in “lining things up, getting thing in line… We have it all neatly separated and categorized” (16). This statement is absolutely true, if we look about our society, the city we live in, the design of our houses, the way desks are arranged in a school, everything is in straight, orderly lines. In contrast, in Native American communities “the reverse is true… instead of separating into categories of the sort, family groups sit in circles, meeting are in circles” (17). These are examples of how the Native American culture places great value on coming together and including people in their traditions. In Toelken opinion, these differences in spatial systems also affect our relationships with
Duane Champagne in Social Change and Cultural Continuity Among Native Nations explains that there has never been one definitive world view that comprises any one Native American culture, as there is no such thing as one “Native community” (2007:10). However, there are certain commonalities in the ways of seeing and experiencing the world that many Native communities and their religions seem to share.
Comparing the past to the present, one of the things that have not changed in the economy is the people’s love for money. Lots of money. There have been many attempts to further increase the amount of money that an economy or an individual can gain. Whether this is through ideas like welfare state where the government supports its people by providing things such as financial support or individualistic ideas like pursuing your own self-interest. The source provided wants all of us to believe that by supporting the ideologies of collectivism through welfare state, it will only result with us depending on the government instead of striving for our own success. The statement from the source, “The welfare state arose out of a misguided desire to
This incorporates the idea that people band together for mutual help and safety, essentially to protect their own interest. By doing this, however, they in turn protect the interests and safety of society.
Cooperation played a major role in the development of homo sapiens as the dominant species on earth. Americans do not understand its importance. It is understandable to place an extremely high level of importance upon self reliance in a dog eat dog society, but individualism has become fear and loathing of others. This motivates people to develop ways they can spend less time with each other. The ultimate expression of individualism, driving a car, illustrates the problem of denying “the reality of human interdependence” (30). “Some people can’t afford to heat their homes because we all want to ride expensive vehicles on crowded roads at high speeds, killing one another and polluting the atmosphere” (2). This situation cannot be repaired until we accept the inherent power in cooperation. “The more we try to solve our problems by increasing personal autonomy, the more we find ourselves at the mercy of these mysterious, impersonal, and remote mechanisms that we have ourselves created” (48).
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).
In the process of production, human beings work not only upon nature, but also upon one another. They produce only by working together in a specified manner and reciprocally exchanging their activities. In order to produce, they enter into definite connections and relations to one another, and only within these social connections and relations does their influence upon nature operate (Marx).
In the recent weeks, I have noticed a trend in our cultural beliefs regarding groups outside of our own. As a nation, while the United States has a strongly individualistic nature from a personal perspective, there is also a strong collectivist belief regarding everyone outside of themselves and their groups. Rather than believing that each member of an external group is responsible for their decisions alone (myth of individualism), separating them from a collective (one bad apple), the consensus is generally geared opposite. For example, the belief that all immigrants want to steal American jobs, when one is not an immigrant, or that feminists are actually misandrists, when one is not a feminist. What I believe we have
The term serves as an alternate for other phrases referring to the era of modern man, such as “anthropocene” or “capitolocene,” which Haraway disagrees with. Rather than the ominous implications of the anthropocene and capitalocene, the Chthulucene is precarious, but not yet doomed because it consists of “ongoing multispecies stories and practices.” The concept of the Chthulucene implies a one-ness shared by all beings, human and non-human. By rejecting the anthropocene and capitolocene, Haraway also rejects the notion that dictates define the age we are currently living. “Anthro-“ and “capital-“ place a certain amount of blame on single entities, namely humans and capitalism, but in the rest of her work, Haraway suggests that recognizing unity and networks is ultimately more important than assigning fault. While the other terms seem to identify a cause for the modern age, Haraway’s Chtulucene emphasizes a method of thinking about and living with the present. In Haraway’s view, the Chtulucene is a vital part of reimagining our existence in the world. She goes on to discuss “tentacular thinking” and “making kin” as other aspects that are key to creating a sustainable world. In order to continue existing,
“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
Civilizations are typically broken up into two categories: collectivist. Individualist cultures, like those of the United States and Western Europe, highlight personal accomplishment regardless of the expense of team goals, causing a powerful awareness of competition. Collectivist cultures, including these of China, Korea, and Asia, emphasize work and family team aims above desires or individual needs.
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
Two of the four coordinates that are completely opposite from each other on this theoretical framework include “Individual” and “Collective.” According to classical theory, “Individual are the patterns of social life which are seen as emerging from ongoing interaction, and Collective are the patterns of social life which are seen as the product of existing structural arrangements” (Appelrouth...
Technology has brought us closer and squeezed the distances, but in reality, it has taken us away from each other. The rapid growth of technology has brought about significant changes in human lives, especially in their relationships. The latest technologies have turned this world into a “global village” but the way humans interact with each other, the types of relationships and their importance has changed a lot. The advancement in technology has brought us closer, but has also taken us apart. In the past, the means of communication were limited.