"No social stability without individual stability." To what extent do you agree or disagree with His Fordship, and do you think our current system of being raised by "family" supports or undermines societal stability?
I agree with this statement to some extent because with individual stability comes some sort of social stability. If people were to think, act and look the same then there would be a sense of social stability. This stability is created because you would not expect a change in a person unlike people who act and look different. But that is the problem, we are humans not robots. We were created to be different, not the same. And I do agree with our current system because society benefits from being raised by family. Our relationships with our family build and strengthen human relationships not just within the home but also beyond that. We learn how to interact with others, what to say and what not to say. All of the things we receive by being raised by ''family'' supports societal stability..
I definitely agree with this statement. To be stable as a group, one would have to be stable within themselves. In some aspect, we are all the SAME person, just tweaked with our own uniqueness. When Huxley uses this quote, he is emphasizing everyone's use of soma as a way to conform to the societal norms of the times. This also is happening in our world today. Everyone may not swallow drugs to feel normal and/or conform, but we definitely use the material things handed to us over the years to make us feel better. For example, just as Lenina has the uncontrollable impulse to take a few grammes of soma, so do we, as everyday people feel the need to conform to the norms of life, which will lead to an even greater social stability. In regards to family, I believe that we are given families so that we can watch our parents or older siblings demonstrate what is supposed to be the "correct" way of cohabitation. Its the age old battle of nature vs. nurture. We we never have stability if we aren't nurtured and we won't know how to act outside of our family settings unless we experience a new setting (nature). Our social stability depends on a family as the backbone to the rest of our lives.
I agree with this statement, one needs to know who they truly are in order to have stability with oneself, eventually leading to stability as a whole. I believe in order to help people with their problems or even to create a better environment, one needs to solve their own problems and get to know oneself, their voice and their own opinions.As for Brave new world their social stability depends on the cloning and brainwashing process. These means of telling people how to think creates their stable society because they are basically robots, dependent on soma to feel something, anything, other than what they are trained to feel. If one individual was to step outside this comfort zone in their world the society would ultimately be ruined because noone ever shares their opinions, noone ever as opinions. In our world today family is the key to knowing oneself, finding ones voice and learning how to become happy and stable with the person you have become. Parents basically draw out a map for you, what religion you believe in, what language you speak, how happy you will be with your household life (if they are stable themselves or not) and as you grow you draw out the destinations in your life. You make choices which ultimately afect how stable you will be later on in life. In our world we are all not as stable as we should be, but just one person wolnt (as in brave new world) in any way upset a balance of social stability, we've had and still have many unstable people in this world.All one can truly do is find a voice, know oneself, and eventually help others to find theimselves too. ~Alicia Weeks block 2
I neither disagree or agree with this statement. If we were all the same in every way there would be no competition, conflict, etc in our lives. We would all be the same and think the same way, therefore we would have a "social stability" like in Brave New World. This kind of stability would only work in a world like the World State, or if we were robots. However, we are humans with feelings, different views, beliefs, and values which makes us all different. Having a diverse world, and listening too everyone also creates a "social stability." For example, since we are all different from each other, we create an environment in where we can all work together because our over all goals are the same. We all want to live and have "social stability." So, even though we are individuals we make this world stable by listening, being respectful, and joining together as one because we all face the same if not very similar problems in life. I think our current system of being raised by "family" definitely supports societal stability. Although family is more than that, it does work as a way to create societal stability. Whether we realize it or not, ever since we are little, we are all raised by our parents, or guardians in certain ways depending on their beliefs and values. For most of us, these ways stay with us as we grow up, but for some our views change as we experience life on our own. Nonetheless, family does make us stable and teaches us what to do, how to do it, etc. This way we know do not have any knowledge when born, can grow up and be successful and smart individuals who leave this world socially stable.
I agree with this statement completely. If individuals in society were not socially stable and confident in who they were, it would result in a society that would have to address numerous amounts of issues with each individual. A society needs all individuals to understand themselves before they can play a part in social stability with others. I think a good example of this is seen in Brave New World through Bernard Marx and his unstableness within their society. Because he does not know who he is individually, it is very difficult for him to find a stable place socially in their society. Socially everyone else excepts the norms of their society in London, Bernard seems to be one of the few who realizes there is more in the world. This brings me to the thought of how important family really is. I believe family is extremely important, it could be presumed that if Bernard Marx had a family to share his thoughts and feelings with he may not have such a hard time being accepted socially. I think family supports social stability because your family is the first support system you will ever have, and essentially your family shapes who you are individually in many aspects. Being raised by a family supports social stability because with out family we really have no one to compare ourselves to, and without others what makes you an individual?
I do believe that there cannot be social stability unless there is individual stability. One must be content, understanding and stable with themselves inorder to create some sort of balance between evryone else in a society. A society is made up of individuals. Without people, there society, in question, would not exist. To create stability between people in a society everyone needs to treat others with repect and equality. I feel that families shape a society. We do not look exactly the same or have the same emotions as everyone else. The term family has many meanings to it. A family is, of course, a mother, father, son and daughter. To me, though, a family consists of a group of people that care for you, try to understand you and are there for you whenever needed. By communicating with one another in a family, people can learn from and understand eachother. This creates stability not just with an individual, but within a family, as well. Because families are the basis of societies, family stability will create societal stability.
To a certain degree I agree with the statement made by His Fordship. The human environment is formed by chain reactions. One must be individually stable before a social stability can be created throughout ones domain. If the first step of obtaining ones individual stability, then such can not be expected to run through that of the society, thus contributing to the idealistic view of the chain reaction that "No social stability without individual stability." Although His Fordship's concept is reasonable, it doesn't necessarily convey that every being has the need to be the same, thus defining the idealistic individual. Our current system of being raised by a "family" reinforces societal stability, due to the fact that within a family one is taught and constantly reminded to persevere, to be greater and better then that whom was before one. The birth of individualism stems from that of a family and increases as social standards are risen as well. If one is frequently admonished to be an individual, and the guidelines are accomplished, then the social stability, not necessarily signifying everything has to be similar, is grasped. Hence the fact that the current "family" system is the foundation of societal stability.
I think that there is great truth to this statement. Society is just the individual mass produced. In order to have any form of control and order for that matter every small detail must be in working. It is like a machine. If even one screw is order the entire thing may fall apart. Society is a set of interrelated parts that work together to reach stability. If we are not at peace with ourselves then we can no positively contribute to society's advancement. If we are in turmoil then we sometimes have no choice but to lash out and create chaos and make society collateral damage in our path of destruction. Even if the dysfuncitons that one is enduring is only self inflicted society ultimately loosed because that individual is not contributing to society in any way.
I think that the current system of family in today's society is something that can not be defined. The "perfect" American blueprint for a family no longer exist. Ultimately, the influence that a family environment can have on an individually, and thus on society, depends on that particular person. Although some situations are more favorable, it is up to the person to rise from a horrid situation or to take advantage of the opportunities presented to them. I think being in any form of family system is beneficial because it puts an individual around people that genuinely care for them and shape their morals and beliefs.This ultimately shapes and progress society.
If I was speaking in terms of a utopia, yes I would agree with Mustapha Mond. In order for there to be social stability, a government created by the civilization, would believe that stability could be obtained by individuals thinking and looking the same. How could one trying to achieve social stability get there if the individuals do not all share the same goals and equality. On terms of equality in "Brave New World" there is not social equality due to the caste system and the roles that the leaders of the world hold. But if we looked at the opposing sides argument, if an individual found his or her own stability, there would be no need for society and they could function on their own. So the stability found in every person will have its own meaning, thus altering what a perfectly functioning society means. Some people would be content with one thing and others would not, not creating the equality. That is why hypnopaedia was need to create this brainwashed society.
Being raised by a family would undermine his system, because everyone is raised upon fundamental values that their family holds dear. Since everyone's views and the way they were brought up, could never help them see eye to eye and truly work together as one cohesive unit. There is no such thing as perfect stability
His Fordship is correct in his statement, well in my opinion. The fundamentals of social stability begin with the individual, seeing as individuals as a whole make up the social society. Without a stable individual, one risks the infectious instability being spread by the original unorthodox individual to those around them. The influence of enough unstable persons may in turn lead to a mass social instability. The way to exert complete social order is through tryannical rule in which human individuality is strongly surpressed, because in the end it is the unique individuality and attitude that may lead to confrontation or unnatural mind set. It is individuality itself and the act of being an "individual" that leaves space for instability, as a result of non-conforming to a specific set of rules, behaviors and actions. As for the ideals of "family", I believe that the modern family is an immense undermining factor to social stability. It has become profoundly uncommon for current society to produce the ideal family. The rate of single parents in this nation is a sky rocketing number. The effects of such a lifestyle can in turn have negative effects on the children. The old fashion morals and ideals are blanketed by dramatic occurrances and sometimes, sadly, struggles. The stability of the family is a deteriorating concept as a sign of the times.
I completely agree with his Fordship because each individual makes up society as a whole and if one individual is off the whole system(society) can not function to its full capacity. Can we expect a car to keep working with the engine malfunctioning? Even a simple bolt holding the car has to be in place or the car would be "unstable". So how can we expect society to be stable if individuals or even just one individual is not personally stable. This is what i feel the book was talking about when they wanted to send Bernard off to Iceland. Bernard did his job but he was personally unstable which eventually would affect society as a whole because society already began to isolate him off from the rest of the world. Our current system definitely undermines societal stability because each and every one of our families teach different ideals and morals to us as an individual. Just how in the sixties some white families taught their kids that racism was a good thing while others did not. We cannot be socially stable with each of us learning and being conditioned to be different by our families. As a system we would each try to do our own thing which would counteract with the other person, causing our system to fail. Unfortunately, I am for families because we are each taken on different paths specifically designed for us and we are able to over come these obstacles because of what our families showed or failed to show us.
I agree with His Fordship because social stability is none other than a reflection of self-stability. Just as people say: education begins at home. If a person does not have self-stability how would they know in which manner to create societal stability? Growing up a child is taught right from wrong, so they may enter society and continue its smooth function. Hence the reason why the “New World” functions so smoothly, because everyone is taught individual stability and has it forced into them through the soma so they may all be harmonious thus making their society peculiarly stable. Finally the system of being raised by “family”, to some level, does support societal stability because it teaches every member the basic ideals society requires every one of its members to know. The basic ideals are to work to support not only one’s self and their family but also society as a whole and to learn how to compromise. On the other hand, “family” might be a dilemma to societal stability because of opposing views that each family might teach, that is how compromise comes in to solve the problem—nevertheless nothing says that the problem will be solved entirely, thus leaving a little wiggle room for some form of societal instability. So generally, I hold the belief that individual stability is necessary for societal stability, however full societal stability will never be accomplished.
irst I would like to say that I refuse to call him his Fordship it makes it sound like I am worshiping cars and that is weird..... Anyway I completely disagree with statement, the idea that we need individual stability to have working social stability is wrong and this is proven everyday in governments and countries around the world. When looking at countries like the US with free speech laws and a democratic system of government one can't find a consensus on anything everyone goes into there own corner and won't come out, period. Look to recently enacted laws like Obamacare, and no this won't be a political statement, this became the epitome of an us versus them scenario on one hand we had the minority of citizens supporting it, including a large percent of the government, and the majority of citizens opposing it, as well as some crazies wanting to add zombie defense measures but that is another story. Eventually as the bill began to see the possibility of life America began to divide into deeper and more complex ridges like Blue-dogs, republicans, democrats, super liberals, super conservatives, weird zombie fearing people, etc, etc but even with all of this division the society still handled it in a relatively peaceful way this is proof that society doesn't need individual stability but more chaos so that views are expressed and opinions made even if they come from those damn zombie people.
I believe that individual stability shapes who we are, what we believe, and what we want to accomplish in our lives. Being unique is the "rage" in today's world; thinking on our own creates who we are: diverse. Yes, diversity is found in the novel, but not TRUE diversity. Gammas and Epsilons are looked down upon by the Alphas and the Betas, creating racial "diversity," more on the edge of segregation, but diversity is so much more; it's our background, our family, and our image. Having a true family, a "mother" (yes that unspeakable and crude word) and a "father," creates who we are. We learn values, customs, and beliefs from our parents, but thankfully, we are able to become exposed to the real world and understand new ideas and beliefs, which is "banned" in the society in Brave New World. Social stability relates to taking our thoughts and beliefs and destroying them, so that we blend in with others. I disagree with His Fordship, mainly because having a family prepares us and shapes us for the real world, the world that is not encased in a safe bottle; we need to become exposed to survive, not become ignorant to the world around us and live in a plastic bubble closed off from society. -Evan Jackson Block Two
Mustapha Mond makes a valid point in stating that for there to be social stability, there must also be individual stability; and in a sense he is very true. In a theoretical case, where a utopia is attainable, for a society to become homogeneous and cooperative, they must individually share the same morals, values and understandings. Today, anyone can understand in a diverse society such as America's, it's physically impossible for everyone to believe in the same things. So on that same note I believe Mustapha was also incorrect, and our current social structure proves that. While in America we may have some instability, it works in our favor. Social stability can still thrive because of tolerance, and in effect that understanding and tolerance for people to have independence and individuality allows society to progress and still be "harmonious".
I believe that "family" is a large contributor of this. Our families, loved ones, friends are the ones which most often shape and influence our beliefs and help us create our individuality. I personally feel that individuality and the acceptance of, through tolerance, is the largest contributor to social stability and family supports that.
I agree with the statement made by His Fordship, because I believe that “a group is only as strong as its weakest member”, within the context of the quote it means that, the only way you can improve stability as a whole is to take each person and work on their own individual stability. Bernard Marx is the perfect example of one individual who lacked stability (within Brave New World). Marx was insecure with who he was as a person, always concentrating on his insecurities, rather than how he benefits society. Marx’s lack of stability affects the rest of society, because he constantly questions his place in the “new world”. A society that is not socially stable lacks firmness in position and confidence. In order to create stability each person must develop their own individuality. Family, I believe does both to support and undermine societal stability. Family acts as a brace for the individual by providing moral support, as well as a sense of values. At the same time, I believe that family undermines stability because it brings with it added dysfunction that is bred within a family.
Good Evening Ms. Hurst, I agree that there is no social stability before there is individual stability because society is comprised of many individuals that vary on morals and beliefs. Such differences here in the United States apply to the social stability because everyone is contributing based on their own individual stability. The individual creates the society. So if the individual is unstable, it might lead to an unstable society. Therefore, individual stability is the first thing that should be considered because it serves as a foundation to creating a stable society. The current system of being raised by a family is very supportive in creating social stability because living in such an environment helps the individual to create their own beliefs and morals that would stay with them until adulthood. The "family" system builds a person's character instead of it being taught mechanically like in the novel at the same time. When living in a family, each individual is treated differently and with a liberated feeling because they can be anything that they want. Such a system helps to create social stability because it builds up individual stability.
Society is an idea of individuals compromising to achieve a standard which represents the society as a whole. The question is then posed, "Who and what becomes compromised?" How much does one have to sacrifice for the sake of the society? A question that supports that the individual indeed becomes lost and shadowed to the molding of the society. I disagree with the statement because it is impossible in reality, yet attainable in Brave New World. Family is the support for my belief. Millions of people are raised in different manners yet when forced into an arena where family isn't always available such manners are conformed to create a stable society. Yes one must know who one is before attempting to co-exist in a greater network, but individual stability creates a dichotomy for any person; function in society or remain to myself in hopes that others will adjust to my beliefs. The family supports the latter. The family is a comfort zone because most ,if not all, abide by the same guidelines until society tries to challenge said guidelines. The family evidently undermines the statement because the family is the only circle of people who one can remain and thrive as one's self. I disagree with the posted statement because I don't believe the individual remains an individual if society is stable. Jalina Pittman BLock 2
I agree with His Fordship's ideal because in order to have social stability, all individuals must think in the same way. Family units undermine social stability because every family comes with its own ideals and opinions different from their neighbors. With social stability, there is no minority or majority, there is only one way that encompasses every individual in a society. Brave New World, on paper, seems like the ideal utopia because everyone has been conditioned since their test-tube birth to think in one way in all areas of life such as class, work, and social norms. The people in Brave New World are taught to have pride in what they do no matter what it is because "even the Epsilons are important". Each individual has been told to know and understand that their existence helps keep society, as a whole, alive, making every individual feel important without creating prejudices against other classes because "everyone belongs to everybody else", Brave New World is, oxymoronically, a structured free-for-all. However, in today's society, a system such as the socialistic utopia presented in Brave New World, would not work because social stability cannot be achieved because we still believe in free will and being in one's own way of thinking and doing; a democracy. As long as we allow people to do and think whatever they want and have "options" in their own life, people are going to form their own opinions and biases which is what causes social unrest because people do not all think the same way. The main reason society in Brave New World achieves social stability is because the elites of society have taken control of birth and death. Control over population input and output is key because that allows the elite/the government to also control how the people think, in the case of Brave New World, Malthusian Drills, Pavlovian Conditioning, and Hypnopaedia are used to memorize every individual to think one way. With all people thinking the same, individual stability is created thus creating social stability. Vanessa Whitney Block 2
Mustapha Mond demonstrates support for the statement "No social stability without individual stability", which represents the theme of the country and the actions that were executed. I agree and disagree with this point of view. Social stability involves religious, cultural, racial and gender factors that forces or willing allows everyone to agree on the same ideals. The dystopic society presented in Brave New World affirms that social stability can occur, but only in a society where everyone has the ability to retain their individual stability. Of course, individual stability has be limited and completely restricts varying view points on social issues. This establishes that nothing can ever be absolute or pure.
Individual stability is predicated on the principle of ones surroundings establishing and building their character. In a society where everyone is conditioned to believe certain things and their persona is created for them, individual stability with social stability is very much possible. However, it is proven that even in the best conditions and circumstances [based on the creators of the dystopic world in BNW, which in their view is the perfect society], human nature can not be completely controlled to the point of the extermination of curiosity that is imbedded in human brain function. Bernard Marx and Lenina adequately suffices to prove this point.
Families play an important role in the development of both social and individual stability. One's position on certain issues such as, religion, education, and culture, depends on the methods people were raised and how much of an impact it had on their personal lives. Families directly correlate with social issues, which is why Mustapha Mond got rid of families because they affected the thoughts of children and how they functioned in society.
I would have to disagree with Ford, I do not believe you need indivual stability in order to have social stability. Individual stability refers to a person's own beliefs, thoughts, habits, and background that controls that person and as Ford would say makes them stable. In the case of Brave New World, none of the people have any individual characteristics that are determined from their past experiences; everything is imprinted in their brian according to their caste level in society. Someone could argue that they are indivually stable, but they are in fact artificially stable, since never have they once had to make a decision for themselves. Anyhow, the society in the book is relatively stable, except for a few exceptions (Bernard and the D.H.C.), even without individual stability.
Now, if you were to agree with the quote and apply it to today's society, you would practically be saying that there is not one individual who is unstable or corrupt. "No social stability without individual stability". Modern society's system of being raised by family undermines societal stability because, unlike the people in the book who accept their caste fate, the people today tend to disagree with opposing beliefs and opinions, therefore causing unstability.
First off, I would like to say, GOLLY THESE BLOG POSTS ARE LONG.
Secondly, I do agree with the concept that with societal stability, one must be individually stable. The whole of the human race is, to some degree, is the same person. The “individual” stability falls more in line with things that I believe in things like Eastern philosophy. Their ideas were such that in order to maintain a balance in an external environment to function, one must first balance themselves. Balance obviously meaning the understanding of your soul and its inner workings. Separately, stable people can function alone. As a collective group, the individual falls into society, and society then becomes the individual.
As far as “family” structure undermining or enhancing the societal stability, I think that done correctly, the structure of raising children is a huge asset to society. Growing up in a secure environment with few changing factors allows the human mind to grow and learn in a safe place. Due to the terrible fact that a vast majority of parents do not have the slightest idea what kind of love and devotion it takes to successfully raise a child, the “family” system fails (pardon my vernacular) epicly. Dysfunctional and unstable adults raise dysfunctional and unstable youth, who ultimately destroy society because they have no role model for the correct way to function in a stable society. Stability requires trust and safety, if one has never had that, how are they supposed to work with it?
I apologize dearly if the post is mediocre, I am EXTREMELY exhausted!
I agree with this statement to a certain degree. In sports I do think that a team is only as strong as its weakest link. And I believe the same applies to a society. If an individual is not stable in there mind and they run around like crazy people then there cannot be a stable society. However if stabliity refers to one mind controlling all other minds, in the way that Mr. Mond meant the statement, then the society is stable but on shakey terms. All it takes then is one mind to pollute the minds of others with the idea of thinking for themselves, which I expect is what will happen in Brave New World. In order for a society to be stable, everyone needs to have different thoughts and cultures, and ideas.
Refering to stability the way Mr. Mond meant the word, being raised by a family undermines social stability. Everyone is raised differently, from reserved modest republicans, to radical liberals, or maybe some have been raised by no family at all, and there family is the elements around them. Mr. Mond would be appalled to see all the differences in our society.
However aside from Mr. Mond's ideals about stability, I think that being raised by different families make our society stable. If people could learn to just accept people for who they are and not what they believe but instead try to understand what other people believe than it would add to the stability to society. There is so much to learn from every person but instead of embracing differences people push them away.
I agree with His Fordship, with the fact that majority of individual needs to be stable before the entire society can have any type of stability. The reason is that a society is made up of all individuals. Everyone is a society matters. It could be the youngest one such as a baby, but the fact still matters that they are important. To be able to have a society there needs to be individuals; to be able to create a stable society you need stable individuals. I believe that this statement in itself is very valid. Even within society today, we have more of a corruption that we had back in the 1970s to the 1990s, because the individuals within our society have been becoming worst. Therefore we don’t have a stable society because we don’t have stably individuals within our society. But at the same time I fell this statement is also invalid because instability within our society works perfectly find for us, we have our ups and downs but we have a good society. As far as families are concerned, I feel that the family plays a key role within society. I feel that family supports this statement, because although we have a corrupt society we still have good and decent people within society and those where the people that were brought up within a decent home and with a loving supporting, and caring family. Family is what influences up to act the way we do and our culture is what gives us our individuality. While family is what helps us remember and stay true to our culture.
I agree with his Fordship. After recovering from the Nine Years War, stability (over all other things) was the main concern of future society. As a last resort the World Controllers ruled out all measures of individualism, resulting in a robotic, yet stable society. By establishing a rigid caste system in which all are "happy", society eliminated the need for individual thought, which is replaced by repetition, conditioning, and of course..Soma. The establishment of uniformity among the masses results in the stifling of free thought, as well as human kinds reliance on artificial instict to replace the independent conscience of the mind.
In any society with freely flowing opinions, ideas, etc. some level of instablilty is inevitably going to occur. Although impractical (and entirely unrealistic) Mustapha Mond's statement of individual stability provides the only absoulute solution to creating a totally stable society, ultimately through the elmination of the individuals tendencines to question, argue, and most importantly, think.
I believe that our current system of "family" ultimately undermines our sense of social stability. Under the sheltering and isolation of a traditional family unit, one is subjected to the bias, unique traditions, and opinions that come to define them as a person. The result of varying upbrigings leads to the possibility of individualism at the cost of stability. The potential of conflict due to unique thought inherently contradicts the ideal of a stable society. The absense of the modern family would result in the stadarization of child-rearing; this uniformity among the people would directly contribute to legitamate stability in society.
To a certain extent, I agree with the statement because if one is not stable then they will not contribute to society. Society is defined as “an organized group of persons associated together for religious, cultural, scientific, political, etc.” If one is “stable” then they have an understanding of themselves, which includes knowing and comprehending their ideas and beliefs. Now, there is no definite group, but that is what society is meant to be; different groups of people coexisting who share different ideas and beliefs. Family contributes to how we think and behave. After all, the majority of people are raised by parents, and many of us have the same beliefs as those of our parents. Unfortunately not everyone aims for the same goal and it definitely undermines social stability. They don't agree with coexisting, and are only hurting themselves because by accepting others then you accept yourself. As you've mentioned in class, being able to question your ideals and beliefs shows a sense of maturity and it shouldn't be shunned but rather accepted since it can lead to a stable society. Cinthya Castro Block 2
I would have to agree with his Fordship. While I do not believe we need to program people to gain individual stability, such as with the Alphas, Betas, Deltas, Gammas, and Epsilons in Brave New World, societal stability is still dependent on the individual. Individual stability involves being confident in your distinct viewpoints, moral values and understandings. If we don't possess separate understandings, we are never able to grow. Diversity makes us stronger.
In many ways, whether it be a community within a corporation or a sports team, it is only as strong as its weakest link, and in order to regain the stability, the individual must have stability as well. We may be different, but we need to have different beliefs in order to reach compromise and not become too pig headed on a subject. Society would become a following based on one belief as it is in the World State if we did not have differences. Individual stability is not only crucial to progression in society, it is also CRUCIAL for future generations.
I believe that our current system of being raised by family does support societal stability. Although many times, families try to push beliefs on each other, by giving children a belief of the parents, it leaves them room to question it, and build that belief or a new one. Family helps to encourage children to be free thinking individuals, which contributes to our societal stability. While there are many conditions where a traditional family may not be the most supportive(neglect), there are other forms of community that can enhance and support societal stability. But any sort of familial support can make a large difference in the stability of society.
For the most part , I disagree with His Forship's statement . The only reason I somewhat agree is because as parts of society , we should all understand the things that benefit and the things that harm our society . Meaning , things like laws need to be followed by individuals to keep social stability . However , this would probably only affect the individuality of someone extreme , like a murderer , rapist , arsonist , etc. . This leads to the reason why I disagree so much . Individuality is something that isn't seen in His Fordship's "brave new world". Yes , they have Betas , Gammas , Espilons , etc. , but within those groups they're all the same . He has created a way to make people act , talk , even think , the way he likes , which conflicts the above statement. A society is suppose to be a community , working together to make things go as best as possible . Yet , His Fordship is really the only one who benefits from "conditioning" . That is exactly why individual stability should only be based on the things that society agrees are dangerous to society itself . When applied like how His Fordship has applied it , then truly it's not even a good society . I don't think our current way of being raised by family undermines societal stability . Mass media still portrays family as a mother , father , and two happy kids , but things are beginning to change . More movies , television shows , books , etc. are starting to represent real life . Single mothers , single dads , grandparents , and all the other families out there . These people work just as hard and pay taxes just like everyone else . So why should we judge them ? They aren't a problem . More important than what they do for society is what they do for each other . They care for and love each other dearly . Love is something that everyone deserves and needs . Without family , how could we get that?
I personally believe that there is both validity to this statement and a “grey area”. With individual stability, the social stability of a population is almost guaranteed. If there is no one to oppose ideas and everyone is in unison, as is the case in Brave New World, then there will be social stability. I disagree with His Fordship when he says that there is “no” stability unless there is individual stability. This translates to me as if there are individuals that are unstable, that there is no chance of social stability. When looking at the statement in this view, it can be proven false in multiple instances. The world that we live in today has multiple individuals that can be seen as “unstable”, but even with these people, there is still social stability. People will still work together for the common goal of social stability, even if their lives are unstable. It would be easier for social stability if every individual was stable, but it is not necessary.
I believe that our current system of being raised by “family” supports societal stability. Our current system of being raised by family teaches us morals and what is right and wrong, the basis of what is needed in a stable society. In this current time period, families are raising children to be open to new ideas and change, to not judge by labels, but by facts. These qualities that are instilled in us by our families makes it so everyone can operate together in society. Thus, making it possible for a stable economy. Most importantly, family teaches us to have compassion for others. This makes us able to take the good and the bad that we may encounter and work through it. I believe family is the foundation to a stable society.
We understand ourselves when we are more stable, and when were more stable within outrselevs it refelcts outwards towards our society. If you are unable to be stable within yourself how can you be stable within a social setting. In today's world your first and greatest influence is your family. But by being raised by your family you have to deal with their views. You are unable to form your own views and when you are unable to form your own you're unable to be an individual person who can find stability within themselevs.
I agree with Ford's comment. Individual stability is essential to the establishment of stability within a society because it maintains order. The government can aid stability by creating laws and a system of education. A lack of stability would lead to anarchy as a result of decreased morals. Our current "family" system aids stability by teaching people lessons they would not have learned in any other situation. Brave New World's society bypasses the traditional family system and chooses to educate by playing children messages in their sleep. This method is advantageous for them because it teaches people only what the government wants them to know, keeping the government in control.
I agree with this comment because in order to be stable as a whole, you must be stable as an individual. Each brick in a wall must be stable for it to stand. The society in Brave New World only functions because each individual (besides Bernard) believes what the government and D.H.C. wants them to is the way they should behave and what they should follow as a group. Our current "system" of being raised by a family helps this level of stability positively, as a family unit there is always someone above you to set some semblance of an example to follow. Through this, people are held to a certain standard because they have been given a right and wrong way to behave from their peers. This example from a family teaches you how to function as an individual, as well as what not to do. - Arien Tripp
I agree with the statement, in that we must be stable as individuals to be stable as a society. In the novel, every being is created to be stable. They do not have any problems in their lives, especially with the use of soma. They are all content with where they are, so the entire society is stable, there is no uproar, or major problems. Obviously “His Fordship” is a genius, in that he has created a stable society, something in which we of our time have never observed. Our system of being raised by “Family” undermines this societal stability, since parents have the ability to mold their children and alter their way of thinking, making everyone an individual, as we are all individuals, but not all stable individuals. Thus, as we are all not stable, the entire society is unstable. In the novel, every individual is created equal, in their castes, but they are all stable(except for Bernard), so the society is essentially stable. In our society we never know what will happen next, we do not know if we will even be here the next day. The real question is, do we truly want a stable society? Be careful what you wish for.
Because social “stability” is open to an array of interpretations, this prompt is best addressed through qualification. His Fordship’s comment on individual stability is legitimate, but only in the context of a Utopian society. In the context of a realistic stable society, his statement is invalid. Similarly, an individual’s “family” contributes both positively and negatively to a community’s solidity.
Life is a series of interactions and experiences, and everything is interrelated. An individual who thinks differently, perhaps about how society should be, proposes the risk of spreading his or her influence to others in the community. As more people begin to adopt varying beliefs, the stability of a standardized Utopian society is jeopardized. In this theoretical civilization, stability is an absolute. It has no room for alterations and is dependent upon complete cooperation and submission by each individual that is, and will be, a component of society. As the Director states in Brave New World, “the social body persists although the component cells may change (97).” This suggests that absolute stability needs to remain an uncompromised objective of society in order to promote the longevity of Utopia.
In the practical society, in which general solidity allows for minor fluctuations, stability is supported by the differences of individuals. Realistic social stability is much like the symbol of Yin and Yang. The dysfunctional aspects of society, the black portion (“yin”), and the functional aspects of society, the white section (“yang”), are incorporated within the outer circle that represents all of society (“everything”). A white spot of functional activity remains within the black segment of dysfunctional activity, and vice versa. This shows how both aspects of society work together and balance each other out to create an overall stable society. For example, Christians and Atheists maintain vastly different beliefs, but can still exist in society without causing utter social dysfunction. Tolerance and respect for the beliefs of others allow for stability amongst a sea of differences and conflicting ideas.
Having “family” in the real world can both promote and hinder social stability. The relatives and friends that one encounters throughout life provide ideas and beliefs that are incorporated into the individual’s own life. Theses influences can cause individual stability and instability, and therefore can also cause social stability and instability. One may gain a sense of self through the love and support a family offers. The ideas instilled upon the individual can shape his or her life positively, but at the same time, there are instances in which the individual is adversely affected. Greg Chapman’s essay, entitled “A Journey Toward Acceptance” and found amid the “This I Believe” collection, describes the narrator’s struggle to uncover his own identity. Infused with the beliefs of his family rather than with his own ideas, Chapman found himself in a deep and unstable depression. This internal conflict was not resolved until he decided to follow what he thought was best for him. If Chapman had never come to this realization, he may have remained an unstable individual of society, thus exemplifying how family can have negative effects on the stability of society as well.
I think that individual stability is important in relation to social stability, because when the individual is unstable the “glue” of society falls apart. Society can’t exist with a group of people being stable and a group not. When one person disrupts the flow all of society feels the repercussions. For example, in our society stability is disrupted when murderers and other various criminals run rampant. Another example would be the start of a revolution. Whole societies don’t simultaneously get the idea to revolt; the idea is sprouted from the mine of one individual who then proceeds to tear apart the stability in society. Our society can make stable individuals by promoting healthy family life. An individual develops their various ideas and mannerisms from their family life. Without family, humans are prone to develop individualistic beliefs that promote self service. A healthy family can nurture an individual’s stability and therefore create a basis for social stability.
Because social “stability” is open to an array of interpretations, this prompt is best addressed through qualification. His Fordship’s comment on individual stability is legitimate, but only in the context of a Utopian society. In the context of a realistic stable society, his statement is invalid. Similarly, an individual’s “family” contributes both positively and negatively to a community’s solidity.
Life is a series of interactions and experiences, and everything is interrelated. An individual who thinks differently, perhaps about how society should be, proposes the risk of spreading his or her influence to others in the community. As more people begin to adopt varying beliefs, the stability of a standardized Utopian society is jeopardized. In this theoretical civilization, stability is an absolute. It has no room for alterations and is dependent upon complete cooperation and submission by each individual that is, and will be, a component of society. As the Director states in Brave New World, “the social body persists although the component cells may change (97).” This suggests that absolute stability needs to remain an uncompromised objective of society in order to promote the longevity of Utopia.
In the practical society, in which general solidity allows for minor fluctuations, stability is supported by the differences of individuals. Realistic social stability is much like the symbol of Yin and Yang. The dysfunctional aspects of society, the black portion (“yin”), and the functional aspects of society, the white section (“yang”), are incorporated within the outer circle that represents all of society (“everything”). A white spot of functional activity remains within the black segment of dysfunctional activity, and vice versa. This shows how both aspects of society work together and balance each other out to create an overall stable society. For example, Christians and Atheists maintain vastly different beliefs, but can still exist in society without causing utter social dysfunction. Tolerance and respect for the beliefs of others allow for stability amongst a sea of differences and conflicting ideas.
Having “family” in the real world can both promote and hinder social stability. The relatives and friends that one encounters throughout life provide ideas and beliefs that are incorporated into the individual’s own life. Theses influences can cause individual stability and instability, and therefore can also cause social stability and instability. One may gain a sense of self through the love and support a family offers. The ideas instilled upon the individual can shape his or her life positively, but at the same time, there are instances in which the individual is adversely affected. Greg Chapman’s essay, entitled “A Journey Toward Acceptance” and found amid the “This I Believe” collection, describes the narrator’s struggle to uncover his own identity. Infused with the beliefs of his family rather than with his own ideas, Chapman found himself in a deep and unstable depression. This internal conflict was not resolved until he decided to follow what he thought was best for him. If Chapman had never come to this realization, he may have remained an unstable individual of society, thus exemplifying how family can have negative effects on the stability of society as well.
I agree with his Fordship’s quote in every aspect of having successful social stability. Before any society is constantly productive and has peace, majority of the individuals must be stable and purposeful; which is adding to the environments goal of thriving as a society. Yes, I do feel like our current system is built on this belief. It’s been 17 years and it hasn’t been 1 day gone by where someone doesn’t try to pursue me to do what the government thinks is ideal for a student (minor) to do. I’ve observed that every sponsor that a government official gives, a school or church support only is bias towards reaching the goal of what the government defines as a successful citizen. A family is supposed to a group of related or emotional close knit group of people that are supposed to help, guide and nourish each other. However, growing up, watching random President’s speak about how a family should be raised to produce a contributor to the working cycle just amazes me. This simple statement can turn the most loving, supportive family into a degrading, negative group; that stresses you into doing what they feel is right. The peer pressure that the average family with simple educated parents and siblings is majority of our system, the only different between them and a free spirited, optimistic person; is the choices they are introduced too. I believe that as my own individual it’s okay to go through disrespect and negativity because they are brainwashed into an unchangeable mode that I can careless about, because I’ve been exposed to more. Jonell Joseph Block: 2
"No social stability without individual stability", I disagree to this clear cut statement on the grounds that individuals breed citizens who are seperate from the whole. The outsider, the lone wolf, the ones, such as Bernard Marx who know they are different and try to change the rest of society to their image. This upsurption of current society damages the stability already in place because now it is not a solid structure that everyone follows, but a constantly swaying "house of cards" in which can fall at any second to make way for this new vision of how society should work. The current system of "family" discourages the previously mentioned statement of social stability because of the individual lifestyles each family exists in. Different mindsets, different beliefs, different cultures, all keeping families from being unified under one ethic, thus creating the individuals willing enough to tear society from its very roots. Even in families themselves, as a miniature example to society as a whole, there can be one out of four individuals who becomes completely seperated from the whole; ever seen one boy wearing a Charged GBH shirt while the rest of the family are wearing button-down shirts?
I agree completely with His Fordship when it comes to there being "no social stability without inividual stability". As an individual, you have to be stable in your environment and in who you are before you become social because if you are unstable, then you could end up being mized into the wrong crowd or even end up portraying something that you don't believe in or like, all because you don't know who you are. I believe that the fact of our current system being raised by "family" does support societal stability because it gives everyone practice. A family is like a social group because it is made up with people that share the same DNA but are not the same peeople by a long shot. For example, my brother and I could pass as twins sometimes, but we are totally different people wheen it comes to our personalities and the way that we handle situations. I am more of the calm one that sits down and rationalizes about my situation, but when he has a problem, he basically takes the hands on approach that leads to confrontation and sometimes physical fighting. Also, by you being in a family, you learn how to interact and deal with the different people around you, which is exactly what happens in a social group. You learn how to voice your opinion in the right way and how to listen and not criticise others and their opinion. The way you deal with your family is more than likely the blueprint of how you deal with anyone in any social group that you become a part of.
I agree that individual stability has to be achieved before social stability. To be a cohesive group, each individual component of that group has to be functioning, in order to work as a whole. Each individual in the “civilized” world depends upon themselves and does not have any emotional attachments to each other so they rely upon themselves. Once each individual is stable then each individual’s stability can contribute to the stability of the collective unit. I believe that being raised by “family” does supports societal stability because family teaches you the fundamentals to go out and live in and contribute to society.
Yes, I agree because if you have no individual stablitity then you can not make it in a group. Just like with certain school group effort projects or with the builiding of Rome, it took everyone's efforts to fimish it, but of one person messed up, it would have been the end of Rome or a lower grade on the project
His Fordship is indeed correct. A society would not be able to go forward and progress if it weren't for individuals with confidence in there own abilities. Without well- adjusted, confident individuals to lead and innovate any given society, the society would fail due to the incompetence of it's citizens. When every one is self-conscious and/or riddled with neuroses, nothing of any merit can be accomplished. And trust me on this, for the M Dawg is an expert on self - consciousness and neuroses. Dear Christ, can you imagine if the whole of a society were populated with people like ME???? I have no doubt that it would fail in a matter of months. And that's a generous estimate. Probably more like weeks...or days. Yes, indeed, Mustapha Mond had quite a valid point when he said "no societal stability without individual stability".
If one cannot control themselves and stabilize their own thoughts and actions than the world would be full of "sheep-headed" people who would only obey what the government tells them to do which would an ideal situation for the government to be in. I agree with his Fordship in that an individual must be stabalized if they are to benefit society in any way. From the governments point of view, and unstabalized person would be Bernard who questions the actions of the government. He continuously attempts to compromize the governments actions by attempting to change Lenina's faith in this highly productive yet stable society. The world would not progress if a lot of people were like Bernard questioning society beacuse then conflict would ensue between two beliefs separating the society putting them on two separate paths creating instability. This makes it vital that every indevidual must be stable in order to create progress. If everyone were to have their own opinion the world would end up as it did for the savages after the Nine Year War...nonexistant.
I agree with Ford's comment that individual stability has to be achieved before social stability. A person who know where to place themselves in society make balances or stabilizes society. With the stability it maintains order in society. Family plays a major role in inculcating a person with things such as, religious beliefs, education, and culture. These things can have an impact on their personal lives forever.
I definitely agree with Ford's statement. To establish social stability one must obtain stability within themselves because society is made up of individuals and for the entire society to be stable it starts with the individual being stable. Being raised by a family undermines this because each family is different in multiple ways, we have different ideals, come from different cultures, have different religions and so on. :)
I agree with this statement to some extent because with individual stability comes some sort of social stability. If people were to think, act and look the same then there would be a sense of social stability. This stability is created because you would not expect a change in a person unlike people who act and look different. But that is the problem, we are humans not robots. We were created to be different, not the same. And I do agree with our current system because society benefits from being raised by family. Our relationships with our family build and strengthen human relationships not just within the home but also beyond that. We learn how to interact with others, what to say and what not to say. All of the things we receive by being raised by ''family'' supports societal stability..
ReplyDeleteGinette Norvelus
{2nd Block} : )
I definitely agree with this statement. To be stable as a group, one would have to be stable within themselves. In some aspect, we are all the SAME person, just tweaked with our own uniqueness. When Huxley uses this quote, he is emphasizing everyone's use of soma as a way to conform to the societal norms of the times. This also is happening in our world today. Everyone may not swallow drugs to feel normal and/or conform, but we definitely use the material things handed to us over the years to make us feel better. For example, just as Lenina has the uncontrollable impulse to take a few grammes of soma, so do we, as everyday people feel the need to conform to the norms of life, which will lead to an even greater social stability.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to family, I believe that we are given families so that we can watch our parents or older siblings demonstrate what is supposed to be the "correct" way of cohabitation. Its the age old battle of nature vs. nurture. We we never have stability if we aren't nurtured and we won't know how to act outside of our family settings unless we experience a new setting (nature). Our social stability depends on a family as the backbone to the rest of our lives.
Ebonie Wells
2nd Block ROCKS !
I agree with this statement, one needs to know who they truly are in order to have stability with oneself, eventually leading to stability as a whole. I believe in order to help people with their problems or even to create a better environment, one needs to solve their own problems and get to know oneself, their voice and their own opinions.As for Brave new world their social stability depends on the cloning and brainwashing process. These means of telling people how to think creates their stable society because they are basically robots, dependent on soma to feel something, anything, other than what they are trained to feel. If one individual was to step outside this comfort zone in their world the society would ultimately be ruined because noone ever shares their opinions, noone ever as opinions. In our world today family is the key to knowing oneself, finding ones voice and learning how to become happy and stable with the person you have become. Parents basically draw out a map for you, what religion you believe in, what language you speak, how happy you will be with your household life (if they are stable themselves or not) and as you grow you draw out the destinations in your life. You make choices which ultimately afect how stable you will be later on in life. In our world we are all not as stable as we should be, but just one person wolnt (as in brave new world) in any way upset a balance of social stability, we've had and still have many unstable people in this world.All one can truly do is find a voice, know oneself, and eventually help others to find theimselves too.
ReplyDelete~Alicia Weeks
block 2
I neither disagree or agree with this statement. If we were all the same in every way there would be no competition, conflict, etc in our lives. We would all be the same and think the same way, therefore we would have a "social stability" like in Brave New World. This kind of stability would only work in a world like the World State, or if we were robots. However, we are humans with feelings, different views, beliefs, and values which makes us all different. Having a diverse world, and listening too everyone also creates a "social stability." For example, since we are all different from each other, we create an environment in where we can all work together because our over all goals are the same. We all want to live and have "social stability." So, even though we are individuals we make this world stable by listening, being respectful, and joining together as one because we all face the same if not very similar problems in life.
ReplyDeleteI think our current system of being raised by "family" definitely supports societal stability. Although family is more than that, it does work as a way to create societal stability. Whether we realize it or not, ever since we are little, we are all raised by our parents, or guardians in certain ways depending on their beliefs and values. For most of us, these ways stay with us as we grow up, but for some our views change as we experience life on our own. Nonetheless, family does make us stable and teaches us what to do, how to do it, etc. This way we know do not have any knowledge when born, can grow up and be successful and smart individuals who leave this world socially stable.
Izabella Szura
Block 2
I agree with this statement completely. If individuals in society were not socially stable and confident in who they were, it would result in a society that would have to address numerous amounts of issues with each individual. A society needs all individuals to understand themselves before they can play a part in social stability with others. I think a good example of this is seen in Brave New World through Bernard Marx and his unstableness within their society. Because he does not know who he is individually, it is very difficult for him to find a stable place socially in their society. Socially everyone else excepts the norms of their society in London, Bernard seems to be one of the few who realizes there is more in the world. This brings me to the thought of how important family really is. I believe family is extremely important, it could be presumed that if Bernard Marx had a family to share his thoughts and feelings with he may not have such a hard time being accepted socially. I think family supports social stability because your family is the first support system you will ever have, and essentially your family shapes who you are individually in many aspects. Being raised by a family supports social stability because with out family we really have no one to compare ourselves to, and without others what makes you an individual?
ReplyDeleteAndrea Siluk Block 2!
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that there cannot be social stability unless there is individual stability. One must be content, understanding and stable with themselves inorder to create some sort of balance between evryone else in a society. A society is made up of individuals. Without people, there society, in question, would not exist. To create stability between people in a society everyone needs to treat others with repect and equality. I feel that families shape a society. We do not look exactly the same or have the same emotions as everyone else. The term family has many meanings to it. A family is, of course, a mother, father, son and daughter. To me, though, a family consists of a group of people that care for you, try to understand you and are there for you whenever needed. By communicating with one another in a family, people can learn from and understand eachother. This creates stability not just with an individual, but within a family, as well. Because families are the basis of societies, family stability will create societal stability.
ReplyDeleteCheyenne Hall
block 4
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTo a certain degree I agree with the statement made by His Fordship. The human environment is formed by chain reactions. One must be individually stable before a social stability can be created throughout ones domain. If the first step of obtaining ones individual stability, then such can not be expected to run through that of the society, thus contributing to the idealistic view of the chain reaction that "No social stability without individual stability." Although His Fordship's concept is reasonable, it doesn't necessarily convey that every being has the need to be the same, thus defining the idealistic individual.
ReplyDeleteOur current system of being raised by a "family" reinforces societal stability, due to the fact that within a family one is taught and constantly reminded to persevere, to be greater and better then that whom was before one. The birth of individualism stems from that of a family and increases as social standards are risen as well. If one is frequently admonished to be an individual, and the guidelines are accomplished, then the social stability, not necessarily signifying everything has to be similar, is grasped. Hence the fact that the current "family" system is the foundation of societal stability.
~Katherine Carrazana
Block 2
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think that there is great truth to this statement. Society is just the individual mass produced. In order to have any form of control and order for that matter every small detail must be in working. It is like a machine. If even one screw is order the entire thing may fall apart. Society is a set of interrelated parts that work together to reach stability. If we are not at peace with ourselves then we can no positively contribute to society's advancement. If we are in turmoil then we sometimes have no choice but to lash out and create chaos and make society collateral damage in our path of destruction. Even if the dysfuncitons that one is enduring is only self inflicted society ultimately loosed because that individual is not contributing to society in any way.
ReplyDeleteI think that the current system of family in today's society is something that can not be defined. The "perfect" American blueprint for a family no longer exist. Ultimately, the influence that a family environment can have on an individually, and thus on society, depends on that particular person. Although some situations are more favorable, it is up to the person to rise from a horrid situation or to take advantage of the opportunities presented to them. I think being in any form of family system is beneficial because it puts an individual around people that genuinely care for them and shape their morals and beliefs.This ultimately shapes and progress society.
Sylvia Percovich
Block IV
If I was speaking in terms of a utopia, yes I would agree with Mustapha Mond. In order for there to be social stability, a government created by the civilization, would believe that stability could be obtained by individuals thinking and looking the same. How could one trying to achieve social stability get there if the individuals do not all share the same goals and equality. On terms of equality in "Brave New World" there is not social equality due to the caste system and the roles that the leaders of the world hold. But if we looked at the opposing sides argument, if an individual found his or her own stability, there would be no need for society and they could function on their own. So the stability found in every person will have its own meaning, thus altering what a perfectly functioning society means. Some people would be content with one thing and others would not, not creating the equality. That is why hypnopaedia was need to create this brainwashed society.
ReplyDeleteBeing raised by a family would undermine his system, because everyone is raised upon fundamental values that their family holds dear. Since everyone's views and the way they were brought up, could never help them see eye to eye and truly work together as one cohesive unit. There is no such thing as perfect stability
His Fordship is correct in his statement, well in my opinion. The fundamentals of social stability begin with the individual, seeing as individuals as a whole make up the social society. Without a stable individual, one risks the infectious instability being spread by the original unorthodox individual to those around them. The influence of enough unstable persons may in turn lead to a mass social instability. The way to exert complete social order is through tryannical rule in which human individuality is strongly surpressed, because in the end it is the unique individuality and attitude that may lead to confrontation or unnatural mind set. It is individuality itself and the act of being an "individual" that leaves space for instability, as a result of non-conforming to a specific set of rules, behaviors and actions. As for the ideals of "family", I believe that the modern family is an immense undermining factor to social stability. It has become profoundly uncommon for current society to produce the ideal family. The rate of single parents in this nation is a sky rocketing number. The effects of such a lifestyle can in turn have negative effects on the children. The old fashion morals and ideals are blanketed by dramatic occurrances and sometimes, sadly, struggles. The stability of the family is a deteriorating concept as a sign of the times.
ReplyDeleteBryana Bell
B4
I completely agree with his Fordship because each individual makes up society as a whole and if one individual is off the whole system(society) can not function to its full capacity. Can we expect a car to keep working with the engine malfunctioning? Even a simple bolt holding the car has to be in place or the car would be "unstable". So how can we expect society to be stable if individuals or even just one individual is not personally stable. This is what i feel the book was talking about when they wanted to send Bernard off to Iceland. Bernard did his job but he was personally unstable which eventually would affect society as a whole because society already began to isolate him off from the rest of the world.
ReplyDeleteOur current system definitely undermines societal stability because each and every one of our families teach different ideals and morals to us as an individual. Just how in the sixties some white families taught their kids that racism was a good thing while others did not. We cannot be socially stable with each of us learning and being conditioned to be different by our families. As a system we would each try to do our own thing which would counteract with the other person, causing our system to fail. Unfortunately, I am for families because we are each taken on different paths specifically designed for us and we are able to over come these obstacles because of what our families showed or failed to show us.
Karlens Direny
Block 4
I agree with His Fordship because social stability is none other than a reflection of self-stability. Just as people say: education begins at home. If a person does not have self-stability how would they know in which manner to create societal stability? Growing up a child is taught right from wrong, so they may enter society and continue its smooth function. Hence the reason why the “New World” functions so smoothly, because everyone is taught individual stability and has it forced into them through the soma so they may all be harmonious thus making their society peculiarly stable. Finally the system of being raised by “family”, to some level, does support societal stability because it teaches every member the basic ideals society requires every one of its members to know. The basic ideals are to work to support not only one’s self and their family but also society as a whole and to learn how to compromise. On the other hand, “family” might be a dilemma to societal stability because of opposing views that each family might teach, that is how compromise comes in to solve the problem—nevertheless nothing says that the problem will be solved entirely, thus leaving a little wiggle room for some form of societal instability. So generally, I hold the belief that individual stability is necessary for societal stability, however full societal stability will never be accomplished.
ReplyDeleteGeorgette Taluy
Block 4
irst I would like to say that I refuse to call him his Fordship it makes it sound like I am worshiping cars and that is weird..... Anyway I completely disagree with statement, the idea that we need individual stability to have working social stability is wrong and this is proven everyday in governments and countries around the world. When looking at countries like the US with free speech laws and a democratic system of government one can't find a consensus on anything everyone goes into there own corner and won't come out, period. Look to recently enacted laws like Obamacare, and no this won't be a political statement, this became the epitome of an us versus them scenario on one hand we had the minority of citizens supporting it, including a large percent of the government, and the majority of citizens opposing it, as well as some crazies wanting to add zombie defense measures but that is another story. Eventually as the bill began to see the possibility of life America began to divide into deeper and more complex ridges like Blue-dogs, republicans, democrats, super liberals, super conservatives, weird zombie fearing people, etc, etc but even with all of this division the society still handled it in a relatively peaceful way this is proof that society doesn't need individual stability but more chaos so that views are expressed and opinions made even if they come from those damn zombie people.
ReplyDeleteEddie McKelligett
Block 2
I believe that individual stability shapes who we are, what we believe, and what we want to accomplish in our lives. Being unique is the "rage" in today's world; thinking on our own creates who we are: diverse. Yes, diversity is found in the novel, but not TRUE diversity. Gammas and Epsilons are looked down upon by the Alphas and the Betas, creating racial "diversity," more on the edge of segregation, but diversity is so much more; it's our background, our family, and our image. Having a true family, a "mother" (yes that unspeakable and crude word) and a "father," creates who we are. We learn values, customs, and beliefs from our parents, but thankfully, we are able to become exposed to the real world and understand new ideas and beliefs, which is "banned" in the society in Brave New World. Social stability relates to taking our thoughts and beliefs and destroying them, so that we blend in with others. I disagree with His Fordship, mainly because having a family prepares us and shapes us for the real world, the world that is not encased in a safe bottle; we need to become exposed to survive, not become ignorant to the world around us and live in a plastic bubble closed off from society.
ReplyDelete-Evan Jackson
Block Two
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMustapha Mond makes a valid point in stating that for there to be social stability, there must also be individual stability; and in a sense he is very true. In a theoretical case, where a utopia is attainable, for a society to become homogeneous and cooperative, they must individually share the same morals, values and understandings. Today, anyone can understand in a diverse society such as America's, it's physically impossible for everyone to believe in the same things. So on that same note I believe Mustapha was also incorrect, and our current social structure proves that. While in America we may have some instability, it works in our favor. Social stability can still thrive because of tolerance, and in effect that understanding and tolerance for people to have independence and individuality allows society to progress and still be "harmonious".
ReplyDeleteI believe that "family" is a large contributor of this. Our families, loved ones, friends are the ones which most often shape and influence our beliefs and help us create our individuality. I personally feel that individuality and the acceptance of, through tolerance, is the largest contributor to social stability and family supports that.
Maria Savarese Block:4 (:
I agree with the statement made by His Fordship, because I believe that “a group is only as strong as its weakest member”, within the context of the quote it means that, the only way you can improve stability as a whole is to take each person and work on their own individual stability. Bernard Marx is the perfect example of one individual who lacked stability (within Brave New World). Marx was insecure with who he was as a person, always concentrating on his insecurities, rather than how he benefits society. Marx’s lack of stability affects the rest of society, because he constantly questions his place in the “new world”. A society that is not socially stable lacks firmness in position and confidence. In order to create stability each person must develop their own individuality.
ReplyDeleteFamily, I believe does both to support and undermine societal stability. Family acts as a brace for the individual by providing moral support, as well as a sense of values. At the same time, I believe that family undermines stability because it brings with it added dysfunction that is bred within a family.
Danielle Malcolm
Block 4
Good Evening Ms. Hurst,
ReplyDeleteI agree that there is no social stability before there is individual stability because society is comprised of many individuals that vary on morals and beliefs. Such differences here in the United States apply to the social stability because everyone is contributing based on their own individual stability. The individual creates the society. So if the individual is unstable, it might lead to an unstable society. Therefore, individual stability is the first thing that should be considered because it serves as a foundation to creating a stable society.
The current system of being raised by a family is very supportive in creating social stability because living in such an environment helps the individual to create their own beliefs and morals that would stay with them until adulthood. The "family" system builds a person's character instead of it being taught mechanically like in the novel at the same time. When living in a family, each individual is treated differently and with a liberated feeling because they can be anything that they want. Such a system helps to create social stability because it builds up individual stability.
Francheska Periche
Block 2
Society is an idea of individuals compromising to achieve a standard which represents the society as a whole. The question is then posed, "Who and what becomes compromised?" How much does one have to sacrifice for the sake of the society? A question that supports that the individual indeed becomes lost and shadowed to the molding of the society. I disagree with the statement because it is impossible in reality, yet attainable in Brave New World. Family is the support for my belief. Millions of people are raised in different manners yet when forced into an arena where family isn't always available such manners are conformed to create a stable society. Yes one must know who one is before attempting to co-exist in a greater network, but individual stability creates a dichotomy for any person; function in society or remain to myself in hopes that others will adjust to my beliefs. The family supports the latter. The family is a comfort zone because most ,if not all, abide by the same guidelines until society tries to challenge said guidelines. The family evidently undermines the statement because the family is the only circle of people who one can remain and thrive as one's self. I disagree with the posted statement because I don't believe the individual remains an individual if society is stable.
ReplyDeleteJalina Pittman
BLock 2
I agree with His Fordship's ideal because in order to have social stability, all individuals must think in the same way. Family units undermine social stability because every family comes with its own ideals and opinions different from their neighbors. With social stability, there is no minority or majority, there is only one way that encompasses every individual in a society.
ReplyDeleteBrave New World, on paper, seems like the ideal utopia because everyone has been conditioned since their test-tube birth to think in one way in all areas of life such as class, work, and social norms. The people in Brave New World are taught to have pride in what they do no matter what it is because "even the Epsilons are important". Each individual has been told to know and understand that their existence helps keep society, as a whole, alive, making every individual feel important without creating prejudices against other classes because "everyone belongs to everybody else", Brave New World is, oxymoronically, a structured free-for-all.
However, in today's society, a system such as the socialistic utopia presented in Brave New World, would not work because social stability cannot be achieved because we still believe in free will and being in one's own way of thinking and doing; a democracy. As long as we allow people to do and think whatever they want and have "options" in their own life, people are going to form their own opinions and biases which is what causes social unrest because people do not all think the same way. The main reason society in Brave New World achieves social stability is because the elites of society have taken control of birth and death. Control over population input and output is key because that allows the elite/the government to also control how the people think, in the case of Brave New World, Malthusian Drills, Pavlovian Conditioning, and Hypnopaedia are used to memorize every individual to think one way. With all people thinking the same, individual stability is created thus creating social stability.
Vanessa Whitney
Block 2
Mustapha Mond demonstrates support for the statement "No social stability without individual stability", which represents the theme of the country and the actions that were executed. I agree and disagree with this point of view. Social stability involves religious, cultural, racial and gender factors that forces or willing allows everyone to agree on the same ideals. The dystopic society presented in Brave New World affirms that social stability can occur, but only in a society where everyone has the ability to retain their individual stability. Of course, individual stability has be limited and completely restricts varying view points on social issues. This establishes that nothing can ever be absolute or pure.
ReplyDeleteIndividual stability is predicated on the principle of ones surroundings establishing and building their character. In a society where everyone is conditioned to believe certain things and their persona is created for them, individual stability with social stability is very much possible. However, it is proven that even in the best conditions and circumstances [based on the creators of the dystopic world in BNW, which in their view is the perfect society], human nature can not be completely controlled to the point of the extermination of curiosity that is imbedded in human brain function. Bernard Marx and Lenina adequately suffices to prove this point.
Families play an important role in the development of both social and individual stability. One's position on certain issues such as, religion, education, and culture, depends on the methods people were raised and how much of an impact it had on their personal lives. Families directly correlate with social issues, which is why Mustapha Mond got rid of families because they affected the thoughts of children and how they functioned in society.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI would have to disagree with Ford, I do not believe you need indivual stability in order to have social stability. Individual stability refers to a person's own beliefs, thoughts, habits, and background that controls that person and as Ford would say makes them stable. In the case of Brave New World, none of the people have any individual characteristics that are determined from their past experiences; everything is imprinted in their brian according to their caste level in society. Someone could argue that they are indivually stable, but they are in fact artificially stable, since never have they once had to make a decision for themselves. Anyhow, the society in the book is relatively stable, except for a few exceptions (Bernard and the D.H.C.), even without individual stability.
ReplyDeleteNow, if you were to agree with the quote and apply it to today's society, you would practically be saying that there is not one individual who is unstable or corrupt. "No social stability without individual stability". Modern society's system of being raised by family undermines societal stability because, unlike the people in the book who accept their caste fate, the people today tend to disagree with opposing beliefs and opinions, therefore causing unstability.
Amy Marshall
Block 2
First off, I would like to say, GOLLY THESE BLOG POSTS ARE LONG.
ReplyDeleteSecondly, I do agree with the concept that with societal stability, one must be individually stable. The whole of the human race is, to some degree, is the same person. The “individual” stability falls more in line with things that I believe in things like Eastern philosophy. Their ideas were such that in order to maintain a balance in an external environment to function, one must first balance themselves. Balance obviously meaning the understanding of your soul and its inner workings. Separately, stable people can function alone. As a collective group, the individual falls into society, and society then becomes the individual.
As far as “family” structure undermining or enhancing the societal stability, I think that done correctly, the structure of raising children is a huge asset to society. Growing up in a secure environment with few changing factors allows the human mind to grow and learn in a safe place. Due to the terrible fact that a vast majority of parents do not have the slightest idea what kind of love and devotion it takes to successfully raise a child, the “family” system fails (pardon my vernacular) epicly. Dysfunctional and unstable adults raise dysfunctional and unstable youth, who ultimately destroy society because they have no role model for the correct way to function in a stable society. Stability requires trust and safety, if one has never had that, how are they supposed to work with it?
I apologize dearly if the post is mediocre, I am EXTREMELY exhausted!
See you tomorrow!
-Tatiana Becker
I agree with this statement to a certain degree. In sports I do think that a team is only as strong as its weakest link. And I believe the same applies to a society. If an individual is not stable in there mind and they run around like crazy people then there cannot be a stable society. However if stabliity refers to one mind controlling all other minds, in the way that Mr. Mond meant the statement, then the society is stable but on shakey terms. All it takes then is one mind to pollute the minds of others with the idea of thinking for themselves, which I expect is what will happen in Brave New World. In order for a society to be stable, everyone needs to have different thoughts and cultures, and ideas.
ReplyDeleteRefering to stability the way Mr. Mond meant the word, being raised by a family undermines social stability. Everyone is raised differently, from reserved modest republicans, to radical liberals, or maybe some have been raised by no family at all, and there family is the elements around them. Mr. Mond would be appalled to see all the differences in our society.
However aside from Mr. Mond's ideals about stability, I think that being raised by different families make our society stable. If people could learn to just accept people for who they are and not what they believe but instead try to understand what other people believe than it would add to the stability to society. There is so much to learn from every person but instead of embracing differences people push them away.
Sarah Hall
Block 4
I agree with His Fordship, with the fact that majority of individual needs to be stable before the entire society can have any type of stability. The reason is that a society is made up of all individuals. Everyone is a society matters. It could be the youngest one such as a baby, but the fact still matters that they are important. To be able to have a society there needs to be individuals; to be able to create a stable society you need stable individuals. I believe that this statement in itself is very valid. Even within society today, we have more of a corruption that we had back in the 1970s to the 1990s, because the individuals within our society have been becoming worst. Therefore we don’t have a stable society because we don’t have stably individuals within our society. But at the same time I fell this statement is also invalid because instability within our society works perfectly find for us, we have our ups and downs but we have a good society.
ReplyDeleteAs far as families are concerned, I feel that the family plays a key role within society. I feel that family supports this statement, because although we have a corrupt society we still have good and decent people within society and those where the people that were brought up within a decent home and with a loving supporting, and caring family. Family is what influences up to act the way we do and our culture is what gives us our individuality. While family is what helps us remember and stay true to our culture.
Sue-Ann Shaw
BLock #4
I agree with his Fordship.
ReplyDeleteAfter recovering from the Nine Years War, stability (over all other things) was the main concern of future society. As a last resort the World Controllers ruled out all measures of individualism, resulting in a robotic, yet stable society. By establishing a rigid caste system in which all are "happy", society eliminated the need for individual thought, which is replaced by repetition, conditioning, and of course..Soma. The establishment of uniformity among the masses results in the stifling of free thought, as well as human kinds reliance on artificial instict to replace the independent conscience of the mind.
In any society with freely flowing opinions, ideas, etc. some level of instablilty is inevitably going to occur. Although impractical (and entirely unrealistic) Mustapha Mond's statement of individual stability provides the only absoulute solution to creating a totally stable society, ultimately through the elmination of the individuals tendencines to question, argue, and most importantly, think.
I believe that our current system of "family" ultimately undermines our sense of social stability. Under the sheltering and isolation of a traditional family unit, one is subjected to the bias, unique traditions, and opinions that come to define them as a person. The result of varying upbrigings leads to the possibility of individualism at the cost of stability. The potential of conflict due to unique thought inherently contradicts the ideal of a stable society. The absense of the modern family would result in the stadarization of child-rearing; this uniformity among the people would directly contribute to legitamate stability in society.
To a certain extent, I agree with the statement because if one is not stable then they will not contribute to society. Society is defined as “an organized group of persons associated together for religious, cultural, scientific, political, etc.” If one is “stable” then they have an understanding of themselves, which includes knowing and comprehending their ideas and beliefs. Now, there is no definite group, but that is what society is meant to be; different groups of people coexisting who share different ideas and beliefs.
ReplyDeleteFamily contributes to how we think and behave. After all, the majority of people are raised by parents, and many of us have the same beliefs as those of our parents. Unfortunately not everyone aims for the same goal and it definitely undermines social stability. They don't agree with coexisting, and are only hurting themselves because by accepting others then you accept yourself. As you've mentioned in class, being able to question your ideals and beliefs shows a sense of maturity and it shouldn't be shunned but rather accepted since it can lead to a stable society.
Cinthya Castro
Block 2
I would have to agree with his Fordship. While I do not believe we need to program people to gain individual stability, such as with the Alphas, Betas, Deltas, Gammas, and Epsilons in Brave New World, societal stability is still dependent on the individual. Individual stability involves being confident in your distinct viewpoints, moral values and understandings. If we don't possess separate understandings, we are never able to grow. Diversity makes us stronger.
ReplyDeleteIn many ways, whether it be a community within a corporation or a sports team, it is only as strong as its weakest link, and in order to regain the stability, the individual must have stability as well. We may be different, but we need to have different beliefs in order to reach compromise and not become too pig headed on a subject. Society would become a following based on one belief as it is in the World State if we did not have differences. Individual stability is not only crucial to progression in society, it is also CRUCIAL for future generations.
I believe that our current system of being raised by family does support societal stability. Although many times, families try to push beliefs on each other, by giving children a belief of the parents, it leaves them room to question it, and build that belief or a new one. Family helps to encourage children to be free thinking individuals, which contributes to our societal stability. While there are many conditions where a traditional family may not be the most supportive(neglect), there are other forms of community that can enhance and support societal stability. But any sort of familial support can make a large difference in the stability of society.
Holly Denton
Block 2
For the most part , I disagree with His Forship's statement . The only reason I somewhat agree is because as parts of society , we should all understand the things that benefit and the things that harm our society . Meaning , things like laws need to be followed by individuals to keep social stability . However , this would probably only affect the individuality of someone extreme , like a murderer , rapist , arsonist , etc. . This leads to the reason why I disagree so much . Individuality is something that isn't seen in His Fordship's "brave new world". Yes , they have Betas , Gammas , Espilons , etc. , but within those groups they're all the same . He has created a way to make people act , talk , even think , the way he likes , which conflicts the above statement. A society is suppose to be a community , working together to make things go as best as possible . Yet , His Fordship is really the only one who benefits from "conditioning" . That is exactly why individual stability should only be based on the things that society agrees are dangerous to society itself . When applied like how His Fordship has applied it , then truly it's not even a good society .
ReplyDeleteI don't think our current way of being raised by family undermines societal stability . Mass media still portrays family as a mother , father , and two happy kids , but things are beginning to change . More movies , television shows , books , etc. are starting to represent real life . Single mothers , single dads , grandparents , and all the other families out there . These people work just as hard and pay taxes just like everyone else . So why should we judge them ? They aren't a problem . More important than what they do for society is what they do for each other . They care for and love each other dearly . Love is something that everyone deserves and needs . Without family , how could we get that?
I personally believe that there is both validity to this statement and a “grey area”. With individual stability, the social stability of a population is almost guaranteed. If there is no one to oppose ideas and everyone is in unison, as is the case in Brave New World, then there will be social stability. I disagree with His Fordship when he says that there is “no” stability unless there is individual stability. This translates to me as if there are individuals that are unstable, that there is no chance of social stability. When looking at the statement in this view, it can be proven false in multiple instances. The world that we live in today has multiple individuals that can be seen as “unstable”, but even with these people, there is still social stability. People will still work together for the common goal of social stability, even if their lives are unstable. It would be easier for social stability if every individual was stable, but it is not necessary.
ReplyDeleteI believe that our current system of being raised by “family” supports societal stability. Our current system of being raised by family teaches us morals and what is right and wrong, the basis of what is needed in a stable society. In this current time period, families are raising children to be open to new ideas and change, to not judge by labels, but by facts. These qualities that are instilled in us by our families makes it so everyone can operate together in society. Thus, making it possible for a stable economy. Most importantly, family teaches us to have compassion for others. This makes us able to take the good and the bad that we may encounter and work through it. I believe family is the foundation to a stable society.
We understand ourselves when we are more stable, and when were more stable within outrselevs it refelcts outwards towards our society. If you are unable to be stable within yourself how can you be stable within a social setting. In today's world your first and greatest influence is your family. But by being raised by your family you have to deal with their views. You are unable to form your own views and when you are unable to form your own you're unable to be an individual person who can find stability within themselevs.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ford's comment. Individual stability is essential to the establishment of stability within a society because it maintains order. The government can aid stability by creating laws and a system of education. A lack of stability would lead to anarchy as a result of decreased morals. Our current "family" system aids stability by teaching people lessons they would not have learned in any other situation. Brave New World's society bypasses the traditional family system and chooses to educate by playing children messages in their sleep. This method is advantageous for them because it teaches people only what the government wants them to know, keeping the government in control.
ReplyDeleteEric Marshall, Block 2
I agree with this comment because in order to be stable as a whole, you must be stable as an individual. Each brick in a wall must be stable for it to stand. The society in Brave New World only functions because each individual (besides Bernard) believes what the government and D.H.C. wants them to is the way they should behave and what they should follow as a group. Our current "system" of being raised by a family helps this level of stability positively, as a family unit there is always someone above you to set some semblance of an example to follow. Through this, people are held to a certain standard because they have been given a right and wrong way to behave from their peers. This example from a family teaches you how to function as an individual, as well as what not to do.
ReplyDelete- Arien Tripp
I agree with the statement, in that we must be stable as individuals to be stable as a society. In the novel, every being is created to be stable. They do not have any problems in their lives, especially with the use of soma. They are all content with where they are, so the entire society is stable, there is no uproar, or major problems. Obviously “His Fordship” is a genius, in that he has created a stable society, something in which we of our time have never observed. Our system of being raised by “Family” undermines this societal stability, since parents have the ability to mold their children and alter their way of thinking, making everyone an individual, as we are all individuals, but not all stable individuals. Thus, as we are all not stable, the entire society is unstable. In the novel, every individual is created equal, in their castes, but they are all stable(except for Bernard), so the society is essentially stable. In our society we never know what will happen next, we do not know if we will even be here the next day. The real question is, do we truly want a stable society? Be careful what you wish for.
ReplyDeleteBrandon Richards
Block 2
To agree, or not to agree: that is the question.
ReplyDeleteBecause social “stability” is open to an array of interpretations, this prompt is best addressed through qualification. His Fordship’s comment on individual stability is legitimate, but only in the context of a Utopian society. In the context of a realistic stable society, his statement is invalid. Similarly, an individual’s “family” contributes both positively and negatively to a community’s solidity.
Life is a series of interactions and experiences, and everything is interrelated. An individual who thinks differently, perhaps about how society should be, proposes the risk of spreading his or her influence to others in the community. As more people begin to adopt varying beliefs, the stability of a standardized Utopian society is jeopardized. In this theoretical civilization, stability is an absolute. It has no room for alterations and is dependent upon complete cooperation and submission by each individual that is, and will be, a component of society. As the Director states in Brave New World, “the social body persists although the component cells may change (97).” This suggests that absolute stability needs to remain an uncompromised objective of society in order to promote the longevity of Utopia.
In the practical society, in which general solidity allows for minor fluctuations, stability is supported by the differences of individuals. Realistic social stability is much like the symbol of Yin and Yang. The dysfunctional aspects of society, the black portion (“yin”), and the functional aspects of society, the white section (“yang”), are incorporated within the outer circle that represents all of society (“everything”). A white spot of functional activity remains within the black segment of dysfunctional activity, and vice versa. This shows how both aspects of society work together and balance each other out to create an overall stable society. For example, Christians and Atheists maintain vastly different beliefs, but can still exist in society without causing utter social dysfunction. Tolerance and respect for the beliefs of others allow for stability amongst a sea of differences and conflicting ideas.
Having “family” in the real world can both promote and hinder social stability. The relatives and friends that one encounters throughout life provide ideas and beliefs that are incorporated into the individual’s own life. Theses influences can cause individual stability and instability, and therefore can also cause social stability and instability. One may gain a sense of self through the love and support a family offers. The ideas instilled upon the individual can shape his or her life positively, but at the same time, there are instances in which the individual is adversely affected. Greg Chapman’s essay, entitled “A Journey Toward Acceptance” and found amid the “This I Believe” collection, describes the narrator’s struggle to uncover his own identity. Infused with the beliefs of his family rather than with his own ideas, Chapman found himself in a deep and unstable depression. This internal conflict was not resolved until he decided to follow what he thought was best for him. If Chapman had never come to this realization, he may have remained an unstable individual of society, thus exemplifying how family can have negative effects on the stability of society as well.
JUDITH! :)
ReplyDeleteI think that individual stability is important in relation to social stability, because when the individual is unstable the “glue” of society falls apart. Society can’t exist with a group of people being stable and a group not. When one person disrupts the flow all of society feels the repercussions. For example, in our society stability is disrupted when murderers and other various criminals run rampant. Another example would be the start of a revolution. Whole societies don’t simultaneously get the idea to revolt; the idea is sprouted from the mine of one individual who then proceeds to tear apart the stability in society.
Our society can make stable individuals by promoting healthy family life. An individual develops their various ideas and mannerisms from their family life. Without family, humans are prone to develop individualistic beliefs that promote self service. A healthy family can nurture an individual’s stability and therefore create a basis for social stability.
---Dakota Edelstein :)
To agree, or not to agree: that is the question.
ReplyDeleteBecause social “stability” is open to an array of interpretations, this prompt is best addressed through qualification. His Fordship’s comment on individual stability is legitimate, but only in the context of a Utopian society. In the context of a realistic stable society, his statement is invalid. Similarly, an individual’s “family” contributes both positively and negatively to a community’s solidity.
Life is a series of interactions and experiences, and everything is interrelated. An individual who thinks differently, perhaps about how society should be, proposes the risk of spreading his or her influence to others in the community. As more people begin to adopt varying beliefs, the stability of a standardized Utopian society is jeopardized. In this theoretical civilization, stability is an absolute. It has no room for alterations and is dependent upon complete cooperation and submission by each individual that is, and will be, a component of society. As the Director states in Brave New World, “the social body persists although the component cells may change (97).” This suggests that absolute stability needs to remain an uncompromised objective of society in order to promote the longevity of Utopia.
In the practical society, in which general solidity allows for minor fluctuations, stability is supported by the differences of individuals. Realistic social stability is much like the symbol of Yin and Yang. The dysfunctional aspects of society, the black portion (“yin”), and the functional aspects of society, the white section (“yang”), are incorporated within the outer circle that represents all of society (“everything”). A white spot of functional activity remains within the black segment of dysfunctional activity, and vice versa. This shows how both aspects of society work together and balance each other out to create an overall stable society. For example, Christians and Atheists maintain vastly different beliefs, but can still exist in society without causing utter social dysfunction. Tolerance and respect for the beliefs of others allow for stability amongst a sea of differences and conflicting ideas.
Having “family” in the real world can both promote and hinder social stability. The relatives and friends that one encounters throughout life provide ideas and beliefs that are incorporated into the individual’s own life. Theses influences can cause individual stability and instability, and therefore can also cause social stability and instability. One may gain a sense of self through the love and support a family offers. The ideas instilled upon the individual can shape his or her life positively, but at the same time, there are instances in which the individual is adversely affected. Greg Chapman’s essay, entitled “A Journey Toward Acceptance” and found amid the “This I Believe” collection, describes the narrator’s struggle to uncover his own identity. Infused with the beliefs of his family rather than with his own ideas, Chapman found himself in a deep and unstable depression. This internal conflict was not resolved until he decided to follow what he thought was best for him. If Chapman had never come to this realization, he may have remained an unstable individual of society, thus exemplifying how family can have negative effects on the stability of society as well.
I agree with his Fordship’s quote in every aspect of having successful social stability. Before any society is constantly productive and has peace, majority of the individuals must be stable and purposeful; which is adding to the environments goal of thriving as a society.
ReplyDeleteYes, I do feel like our current system is built on this belief. It’s been 17 years and it hasn’t been 1 day gone by where someone doesn’t try to pursue me to do what the government thinks is ideal for a student (minor) to do. I’ve observed that every sponsor that a government official gives, a school or church support only is bias towards reaching the goal of what the government defines as a successful citizen. A family is supposed to a group of related or emotional close knit group of people that are supposed to help, guide and nourish each other. However, growing up, watching random President’s speak about how a family should be raised to produce a contributor to the working cycle just amazes me. This simple statement can turn the most loving, supportive family into a degrading, negative group; that stresses you into doing what they feel is right. The peer pressure that the average family with simple educated parents and siblings is majority of our system, the only different between them and a free spirited, optimistic person; is the choices they are introduced too. I believe that as my own individual it’s okay to go through disrespect and negativity because they are brainwashed into an unchangeable mode that I can careless about, because I’ve been exposed to more.
Jonell Joseph
Block: 2
"No social stability without individual stability", I disagree to this clear cut statement on the grounds that individuals breed citizens who are seperate from the whole. The outsider, the lone wolf, the ones, such as Bernard Marx who know they are different and try to change the rest of society to their image. This upsurption of current society damages the stability already in place because now it is not a solid structure that everyone follows, but a constantly swaying "house of cards" in which can fall at any second to make way for this new vision of how society should work.
ReplyDeleteThe current system of "family" discourages the previously mentioned statement of social stability because of the individual lifestyles each family exists in. Different mindsets, different beliefs, different cultures, all keeping families from being unified under one ethic, thus creating the individuals willing enough to tear society from its very roots. Even in families themselves, as a miniature example to society as a whole, there can be one out of four individuals who becomes completely seperated from the whole; ever seen one boy wearing a Charged GBH shirt while the rest of the family are wearing button-down shirts?
Isaac Amor Block 2
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree completely with His Fordship when it comes to there being "no social stability without inividual stability". As an individual, you have to be stable in your environment and in who you are before you become social because if you are unstable, then you could end up being mized into the wrong crowd or even end up portraying something that you don't believe in or like, all because you don't know who you are. I believe that the fact of our current system being raised by "family" does support societal stability because it gives everyone practice. A family is like a social group because it is made up with people that share the same DNA but are not the same peeople by a long shot. For example, my brother and I could pass as twins sometimes, but we are totally different people wheen it comes to our personalities and the way that we handle situations. I am more of the calm one that sits down and rationalizes about my situation, but when he has a problem, he basically takes the hands on approach that leads to confrontation and sometimes physical fighting. Also, by you being in a family, you learn how to interact and deal with the different people around you, which is exactly what happens in a social group. You learn how to voice your opinion in the right way and how to listen and not criticise others and their opinion. The way you deal with your family is more than likely the blueprint of how you deal with anyone in any social group that you become a part of.
ReplyDeleteVashti Powell
Block 4
I agree that individual stability has to be achieved before social stability. To be a cohesive group, each individual component of that group has to be functioning, in order to work as a whole. Each individual in the “civilized” world depends upon themselves and does not have any emotional attachments to each other so they rely upon themselves. Once each individual is stable then each individual’s stability can contribute to the stability of the collective unit. I believe that being raised by “family” does supports societal stability because family teaches you the fundamentals to go out and live in and contribute to society.
ReplyDeleteWilliam weeks 4th block-
ReplyDeleteYes, I agree because if you have no individual stablitity then you can not make it in a group. Just like with certain school group effort projects or with the builiding of Rome, it took everyone's efforts to fimish it, but of one person messed up, it would have been the end of Rome or a lower grade on the project
His Fordship is indeed correct. A society would not be able to go forward and progress if it weren't for individuals with confidence in there own abilities. Without well- adjusted, confident individuals to lead and innovate any given society, the society would fail due to the incompetence of it's citizens. When every one is self-conscious and/or riddled with neuroses, nothing of any merit can be accomplished. And trust me on this, for the M Dawg is an expert on self - consciousness and neuroses. Dear Christ, can you imagine if the whole of a society were populated with people like ME???? I have no doubt that it would fail in a matter of months. And that's a generous estimate. Probably more like weeks...or days. Yes, indeed, Mustapha Mond had quite a valid point when he said "no societal stability without individual stability".
ReplyDeleteRev. Mack Kennedy
If one cannot control themselves and stabilize their own thoughts and actions than the world would be full of "sheep-headed" people who would only obey what the government tells them to do which would an ideal situation for the government to be in. I agree with his Fordship in that an individual must be stabalized if they are to benefit society in any way. From the governments point of view, and unstabalized person would be Bernard who questions the actions of the government. He continuously attempts to compromize the governments actions by attempting to change Lenina's faith in this highly productive yet stable society. The world would not progress if a lot of people were like Bernard questioning society beacuse then conflict would ensue between two beliefs separating the society putting them on two separate paths creating instability. This makes it vital that every indevidual must be stable in order to create progress. If everyone were to have their own opinion the world would end up as it did for the savages after the Nine Year War...nonexistant.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ford's comment that individual stability has to be achieved before social stability. A person who know where to place themselves in society make balances or stabilizes society. With the stability it maintains order in society. Family plays a major role in inculcating a person with things such as, religious beliefs, education, and culture. These things can have an impact on their personal lives forever.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree with Ford's statement. To establish social stability one must obtain stability within themselves because society is made up of individuals and for the entire society to be stable it starts with the individual being stable. Being raised by a family undermines this because each family is different in multiple ways, we have different ideals, come from different cultures, have different religions and so on. :)
ReplyDelete