Wednesday, December 5, 2018

Self Reflection the Sentiments by Self-Reliance by Ralph Emerson


Name
Course
Instructor
Date
Self Reflection the Sentiments by Self-Reliance by Ralph Emerson
Self-Reliance, authored by Ralph Emerson, is one of the interesting pieces of literature that evoke sentiments on how one can lead a fulfilling and even happy life. Concisely, the author advocates people to nurture self-reliance if they are to live a meaningful and purposively life. Accordingly, people should desist from pursuing blindly the paths of others. Instead, they should always trust and follow their instincts and make personal choices. Self-reliance is the source of optimism and hope and pillar of productive, efficient, and self-sustaining society, while imitation is death of an individual. In asserting his message, Ralph Emerson uses pathos, logo and ethos, which he underscores using sentimental quotes. One of his notable quotes is, “What must I do, is all that concerns me, not what the people think” (Emmerson 5). Reflecting upon this quote and relating to the personal life, I argue that it is a self-validating slogan and a recipe to a happy and fulfilling life that will cushion one stress caused by societal pressure and foster creativity for solving various personal problems.
Understanding the Context of the Quote
The quote is presented as an emphasis on the need for individuals to shun from counting on approval from the society in their pursuit of personal life goals.  Essentially, the author can be inferred to be acknowledging that a society can have adverse effects on individual growth. The only countermeasure to this adverse effect is self-sufficiency, which accords an individual the freedom to discover the self and work towards attaining independence (Emmerson 3). Accordingly, the author can be seen to urge the followers to nurture a habit of following individual and desist from conforming to social expectations. People should also follow their own voices instead of clinging to those of the intermediaries such as the church. Moreover, every person should also be honest with their relationships, develop own culture, and be concerned about personal progress instead of social progress. The end goal of self-reliance is, in this case, a productive, efficient, and self-sustaining society. Thus, one of the fascinating questions to ask regarding Emerson’s Self-Reliance essay is whether his quote is valid.
How I Agree with the Quote
            A reflection on the quote in relation to personal experiences qualifies it as a valid one. To begin with, the effect of evaluating and pursuing individual goals in the lenses of the society is costly and robs people of self-consciousness, causing them suffering that is otherwise preventable. The suffering is largely a psychological problem characterized by fears, worries and emotions resulting from the inability to fulfill societal expectations. Therefore, if people can learn to understand and acknowledge that suffering is caused by impermanent problems resulting from inability to fulfill societal expectations that can be ignored, then they will be able to live a happy and fulfilling life.  However, this begins with nurturing self-reliance and differentiating what matters to an individual and believing in oneself.
Indeed, I have once been a victim of lack of self-reliance, something that caused me to make blunders. For instance, I used to think that the only source of happiness is wealth. I would go by the society, cherishing capitalist ideals such as loving money, big cars, houses and diamonds. I also used to think that there were certain social standards that people should observe. I would struggle to conform to the standards and ideals of society and stress myself. However, I came to realize that such views were merely socially constructed and were limiting me and making me a fool. There more I realized that life is how an individual makes it, the more I realize that most of the things that the society has created are vanity. I find that nurturing self-reliance has several benefits.
In one way, it is a source of creativity and a solution to many personal problems. The principle of the self-reliance teaches people to strive towards making the informed rational choices. These rational choices are expected to optimize happiness and lead to pleasurable outcomes.  Self-reliance gives ways to right mindfulness encourages individuals to strive towards reconciling their feelings with their soul, including nurturing positive feelings and image, while shunning distress and greed with the reference to the ways of the world. Such mindfulness encourages one to be conscious of the self and undertake the course of actions that lead to happiness without waiting for approval of the society.
It then also follows that self-reliance is a source is a source of right view. One will see that the right views encourage individuals to nurture a positive perspective on life and circumstances. For instance, it discourages one from being pessimistic just because other people are.  Moreover, it gives accords the people the liberty to approach world issues with creativity and flexibility, attesting to the fact that the solution to common world problems can be resolved at an individual level. Therefore, one can consider it as a recipe for the right course of thinking and acting, too. This right view is expected to make one to lead a fulfilling life because it minimizes the problems associated with the wrong perception that the society creates. After all, every person is unique, meaning that the needs and abilities of every individual should not be generalized or even be subjected to the same societal judgment (Livni).
Indeed, society has been able to progress because some individuals came up with original ideas. To do so, they had to move away from imitating and following what common views and thinking of the society. The author acknowledges the paths followed by philosophers such as Plato and eminent artists. In the same way, self-reliance is expected to break the York of mental slavery and give people the liberty to be creative in resolving problems. Thus, I have come to establish these self-reliance teachings to relate to positive psychology, which essentially subscribes to the ideology that living a happy and fulfilling life is essentially a personal choice and that happiness can only be sought within once soul.  In this regard, I would recommend that positive psychology should borrow self-reliance teachings to enhance the viability of its practices from an interdisciplinary practice perspective. By using this principle, psychology is best placed to help people manage problems such as stress that people fall into because of worrying about unfulfilled social expectations that are otherwise transient in nature and do not mean much for life.
Conclusion
            In conclusion, Emerson’s quote is a self-validating slogan and a recipe for a happy and fulfilling life that will cushion one stress resulting societal pressure and encourage creativity and originality in solving personal problems. The quote encourages people to desist from pursuing blindly the paths of others. Instead, they should always trust and follow their instincts and make personal choices. Self-reliance is the source of optimism and hope and pillar of productive, efficient, and self-sustaining society, while imitation is the death of an individual. Indeed, lack of self-reliance robs people of creativity and makes people mental slaves who cannot respond to personal problems. Indeed, since every person is unique, the only way to realize individual potential is to pursue the path of self-reliance.
Works Cited
Emerson, Ralph. Self-Reliance. 1841. Web. 6th December, 2018.<https://math.dartmouth.edu/~doyle/docs/self/self.pdf>
Livni, Ephrat. Don’t be afraid to create: Ralph Waldo Emerson’s life-changing advice on trusting your instincts. January 22, 2017. Web. 6th December, 2018. < https://qz.com/890636/ralph-waldo-emersons-essay-on-self-reliance-has-an-important-message-about-creativity>

Can Plato’s Kalllipolis Come into Being?


Name
Course
Professor
Date
                              Can Plato’s Kalllipolis Come into Being?                    
One of the striking works in the world was the Republic, and even with more passing time, it still is on the top list of intellectually and historically compelling writings of political as well as philosophical theories. Of the earliest philosophers, Plato was famous for developing a utopian state model. Utilizing his concepts of a just society, Plato had an assertion of creating an ideal city using a fictitious discourse between Socrates and other philosophers. There has been a lot of arguments amongst scholars over the centuries regarding the intent of Plato in writing the Republic. However, its effect on succeeding philosophers and societies tends to be evident. Among the purposes of Plato's Republic is bringing forward the concept of a just state. He gives a sketch of how such a nation should be structured, the people that would govern it, the type of education that could be offered to the children and several other aspects.
Plato additionally goes into detail, declaring the ideas that might strike a contemporary leader to be petty, and more so wicked. Utopia is a society characterized by extremely desirable aspects or rather a perfect community.[1] Nevertheless, the most crucial question is if Plato's Kalllipolis can come to being. Arguments around the query tend to differ among various philosophers with some stating that his ideas were just but fictional while others visualize a strong possibility. Some of the elements comprised in the utopia are exceedingly current, but it is indeed impossible for Plato’s Kalllipolis to be built and prevail in the modern society.
The initial suggestion for the Republic’s deal city is regarded as a sincere and health model for utopian life. The city offers only the most fundamental necessities for its citizens encompassing shoes, shelter, food, and clothing. Its construction is on a modest division of labour whereby every person performs a simple task depending on his most proficient skills.[2]Everyone agrees to take his stand in the City and engages in activities that are supposed to benefit him as well as the rest of the citizens.The reason for doing is this that his requests are met. Plato proposes kallipolis to be the ideal political state. His proposition of presenting the ideal city is the construction of a model of justice as it may be evident in a governmental entity or nation. He argues that the city, as well as the people, are just and as such competition among the citizens does not exist. Consequently, a government is not necessitated. 
According to Plato, the reason for forming political organizations is because no person is self-satisfactory. This principle could be referred to as the principle of non-self-sufficiency. He maintains that people join together since they understand that doing so is in their shared interest. He additionally declares a policy of specialization which suggests that needs are more adequately met when a person pays attention to his/her exertions on a single product to be shared with everyone. As such, a small political entity of around four or five people could exist in which a builder, farmer, physician, cobbler and weaver are present. Plato further affirms that intrinsic variations in humans will be more suitable for one person in one job more than another.  As such, a person will be right for a specific communal task, and this may be termed as a suitability principle. The outcome is a first city that Socrates defines in rather bucolic if modest terms. Glaucon, however, objects that Socrates has realized a town for pigs devoid of luxuries and delicacies.
The rigid codes of public as well as private morality and law which ought to be strictly practical could exert a little pressure and confusion among citizens. No rules might have the facility to deflect such interference. Additionally, the ideal society by Plato does not permit needless luxuries. Not incorporated in the education system are dialectic, mathematics as well as music fields that may considerably lead to the development of human behaviour.  Prosperity may fail to prevail if the appropriate faith in God does not exist. With this, there is not a right of free will among people.
During their creation by God, the guardian mansion was made of gold, the guards aided of silver and the creators using copper and iron. This displays racist act rather than justice. The ideal state termed appears to be highly tranny. The order of Plato’s State is justice, and the city is the observable embodiment of fairness under the provisions of the human community. [3]The utopia is not a model that promotes freedom to all people. Conversely, it is an excellent depiction of the liberty of a state in its uprightness and togetherness.  As such, Plato has brought into being a totalitarian system that has the aptitude to split people into varied social classes.
Plato's encouragement of injustice is on an intense level. Regardless of how perfect a state is, things can never be right with inequality in the picture. Plato tends to believe that political control should be concerted in a miniature, intelligently superior elite. There is the promotion of inclusive governance of art, speech, thought and the nation gets to choose the job that a person takes. In other words, every aspect of life is utterly planned according to the top-down state philosophy that is executed by force. The reason for drawing comparisons with the Soviet Union still is beyond comprehension for most people. And yet, there appears to be additional totalitarianism noticeable in its Fascist strands which extends further as it raises above and past the personals so possesses its organic eminence as well as combined value. The mechanisms through which people form groups and attempt promoting the lives of one another is individuals are s fetish as an association superior and fundamentally meaningful in its own right. 
The concept of Plato on justice is propelled by his verdict that all the things in nature are the composition of a hierarchy and that nature tends to be preferably a massive harmony, the cosmic symphony with all the species and people serving a purpose. The satire of prevailing in governments is intensified by the natural and seemingly subsidiary way in which there is an introduction of previous remarks.[4]The perception of anarchy tends to be the superlative evil, the greatest unnatural and unjust state. Like nature, the unjust state is hierarchical, and people are positioned by their capabilities and ultimately located in the social hierarchy. The platonic perception is entirely foreign to the contemporary open-minded democratic world.  People are used to a diversified, free and sometimes chaotic community which understands nearly nothing of rigid hierarchies. The life of Plato was in an Athens which to his irritation was in jeopardy of losing the cultural as well as military reputation. As such, it was succumbing to crumbling impacts from within and internationally. He visualized an older improved nation collapsing around him, and he wanted to comprehend the things that had gone astray and the strategies that could be used in fixing it.
It has been said that Plato is guilty of his totalitarianism. This is because of his persistence on finding Hegelian philosophy as well the 20th-century Fascist system to the Republic. Supposedly, the fact that Plato emphasizes a lot on the significance of state stability does not help his case.  The philosopher speaks in length regarding the necessity of creating a structure that could fight turbulence and remain strong.  He describes political justice regarding the deeds that assist in serving the goal. Therefore, people become little ethical cogs essential only so long as they help in constituting the machine.
Struggles, worries and the concept of human nature are part and parcel of human beings, and as such, people cannot live without them. Hardships enable humans to not take the good things in life for granted. When it comes to Utopia, everything ought to be perfect meaning that bad things would not exist. Without knowing that bad things do subsist, it would be difficult to find happiness. People tend to be pleased because the bad things are not technically happening to them. With the society being perfect, people would have to feel satisfied. In achieving this, the community will require to bring instances of unhappiness.
One of the philosophers that are in contrast with Plato's insight is Aristotle. He expresses the manner in which the state happened and asserts that every nation is natural. He comes to this deduction by an examination of important human relations in their easiest form. Plato and Aristotle tend to differ in the outlook about nature and its association to the state. The whole validation of Plato for referring to his state as an ideal and clarifying the details of its association to such a level is that it tends to replicate the description of justice. This shows that it is merely his state that is natural. 
Plato has to object the perception of Aristotle because if he did not, then his ideal state would stop to be any more natural compared to the rest. The definition of justice would crush, and as such, the following subjects on the Republic would cease to be of any significance. A community originates from the wishes of men.[5]If Plato was to agree that every state is natural like Aristotle states the, he ought to admit that each nation is also just in accordance to his description of justice. Then, despite all states being just for the reason that they are natural, they remain to be unnatural and unfair since they do not observe the rules of specialized labour that would leave every nation unjust and just as well as natural and unnatural at comparable times.
Additionally, if every state is just, then there is not a purpose for Plato’s state being ideal or superior to any other type of nation. If the state he creates is not any better than others, the precise exhaustive qualifications that Plato reveal in association to the leader appear ridiculous, and the same applies to his book which is full of these notions. Plato does not have any alternative other than rejecting the claims put forward by Aristotle that every state is natural for reasons of preserving the validity of his description of nature, ideal state as well as justice.[6]
Initially, it was declared that factual knowledge has as its entity that what is. Besides, the other stages of ignorance thought, and opinion tends to hold as their objects correspondingly that which is and that which is not and that what morality is not. The item of ignorance is explicated as that which is not existent just like unicorns. Differentiating between the phases of opining and knowledge is essential since the philosopher king ought to have accurate knowledge as his object for the reason that it is dependable versus opinion which is imperfect. The explanation of objects of knowing and opining was better by splitting into two sections.
Knowing tends to possess its object t forms and math meaning that conclusions are attained by belief and imaging. The definition of forms is that as the importance of beauty and understanding that is everlasting, immaterial could only be recognized by education. The philosopher kings should possess as their proper object acquaintance and ought to understand math principles. Eventually, the most significance essence is the form of good to recognize if justice is really good and rule for the advantage of the polis. The construction of Plato's ideal state is from the more profound non-realistic outlook.
A citizen is just but a man, and not a slave or woman, who has the capacity of rational thinking and judgement. The essence of man is political association because he has the capability of language. Distinct from the sounds that animals make, that merely explicate pleasure and pain, the language applied by people is not only used in declaring pain and pleasure but also the just as well as unjust. Human beings have the facility to judge good and evil matters of this nature. The competence of thought and language is accountable for the formation of a family and polis since on a natural basis, man collectively groups depending on the collective discernment of just and unjust.
In conclusion, Plato’s Kalllipolis is impossible to come into being. The initial suggestion for the Republic's deal city is regarded as a sincere and health model for utopian life. The town offers only the most fundamental necessities for its citizens encompassing shoes, shelter, food, and clothing. The motive for forming political organizations is because no person is self-satisfactory. This standard could be referred to as the principle of non-self-sufficiency. He maintains that people join together since they understand that doing so is in their shared interest. Plato's encouragement of injustice is on a high level. Despite how perfect a state is, things can never be right with inequality in the picture. Plato tends to believe that political control should be concerted in a miniature, intelligently superior elite
The concept of Plato on justice is driven by his verdict that all the things in nature are the composition of a hierarchy and that nature tends to be preferably a massive harmony, a cosmic symphony with all the species and people serving a purpose. In the perception of anarchy tends to be the excellent evil, the greatest unnatural and unjust state. Struggles, worries and the concept of human nature are part and parcel of human beings, and as such, people cannot live without them. Hardships enable humans to not take the good things in life for granted. Plato has to object the perception of Aristotle because if he did not, then his ideal state would stop to be any more natural compared to the rest. The interpretation of justice would crush, and as such, the following subjects on the Republic would cease to be of any essence. If every state is just, then there is not a purpose for Plato's state being ideal or superior to any other type of nation






















Works Cited
Burnyeat, Myles . "Culture and society in Plato's Republic." Tanner Lectures on Human Values 20 (1999): 215-324             
Sayers, Sean. Plato's Republic: an introduction. Edinburgh University Press, 1999




[1] Myles Burnyeat,Culture and society in Plato's Republic, pg 217

[2] Sean Sayers, Plato's Republic, pg 63  

[3] Sean Sayers, Plato's Republic, pg 9    

[4] Sean Sayers, Plato's Republic, pg 21
[5] Sean Sayers, Plato's Republic, pg 21
[6] Myles Burnyeat,Culture and society in Plato's Republic, pg 255