Final Paper (4/29)

The final paper is an opportunity for reflecting on the “big picture” and uniting the various streams of thought we have been exploring this semester. In your paper, please address the following questions:

•    Why do human beings live in community?

•    How do we help communities progress and people flourish?

•    How do we ensure that communities do not become dystopian?

•    Is the perfect community possible? Will we ever achieve perfect social justice? Why or why not?

•    What would the ideal community look like?

•    What role might faith, doubt, and reason play in avoiding dystopia and striving for the ideal community?

The paper will be between 10 and 15 double-spaced pages long and must incorporate at least the following:

•    Two religious texts (the Ten Commandments, Amos or Micah, the Beatitudes, King texts)*

•    Two philosophical texts (Plato, Freud, Marx and Engels)

•    One dystopian text (Orwell or Atwood)

* Each of these will count as one text. In other words, you may not use the two versions of the Ten Commandments, the two prophetic books, the two versions of the Beatitudes, or two of the King texts as your two religious texts. You must pick two different groups of texts (e.g. the Ten Commandments and King, King and Amos or Micah, the Beatitudes and the Ten Commandments, etc.) for your two religious texts.

Additional texts from the course may be used. Please cite biblical texts by book, chapter and verse, and all other texts by author last name, title, and page number.

FYS 120

Final Paper

Community is the essential yet potentially destructive glue that binds humans together. The ultimate goal of an ideal community is perfect social justice and human flourishing.  The adhesion of various talents and strengths in community can help accomplish this goal by forming a solid structure of innovation and progress.  If power and corruption seep in, however, a thriving community can easily crumble into a dystopia.  The citizens of a community are responsible for preventing the emergence of a dystopian society through education, relationships, and involvement.  Faith, doubt, and reason play a particularly important role in this prevention by distinguishing genuine ideals from idolatry, encouraging questioning of authority, and promoting motivated, engaged citizens.

Human beings live in community because it is a necessary establishment to control human nature and a fulfillment of human desires.  Human nature can be reflected as two sides of the same coin—the dark, destructive side and the loving, life-promoting side.  This double sidedness gives humanity both the capacity and necessity to live in community.  The multiple aspects of the human personality “present the struggle between Eros and Death, between the instinct of life and the instinct of destruction” (Freud, Civilization and Its Discontents, 82).   The life force, Eros, is the part of humanity that makes civilization possible because it involves loving, cooperative, and altruistic qualities that enable people to positively interact and support one another.  The human ability and desire to love makes it possible to be in relationships that can ultimately grow into community.  Freud notes that “civilization is a process in the service of Eros, whose purpose is to combine single human individuals, and after that families, then races, peoples and nations, into one great unity, the unity of mankind” (Freud, Civilization and Its

Discontents, 81).  The opposing, dark side of human nature, however, is what makes civilization necessary.  Humanity’s destructive, aggressive, and selfish instincts are untamed without the reigns of society.  Freud explains that “man’s natural aggressive instinct, the hostility of each against all and of all against each, opposes this programme of civilization” (Freud, Civilization and Its Discontents, 82).  Civilization is the means to control the instincts of human nature that seek to destroy it, making it a necessary establishment.  Freud believes that humanity formed civilization for two reasons:  “the compulsion to work, which was created by external necessity, and the power of love, which made the man unwilling to be deprived of his sexual object —the woman—, and made the woman unwilling to be deprived of the part of herself which had been separated off from her—her child” (Freud, Civilization and Its Discontents, 55).  The mastery of nature due to the desire to work and the regulation of relationships due to the influence of love show how humanity’s capacity to form civilization is related to the necessity to do so.  Human beings live in community because it both subdues their evil desires and utilizes their unique ability and desire to be in relationships.

Another reason that human beings live in community is because it showers benefits on its inhabitants.  A significant benefit of community is that humanity is stronger in civilization than alone.  Humanity can accomplish more through politics, is more efficient and productive through technology, and can establish rules and regulate relationships through law.  Advanced civilizations also present benefits such as art, beauty, order, and intellectual pursuit.  According

to Freud, however, people living in community must sacrifice some happiness in order to gain this protection and order:  “Civilized man has exchanged a portion of his possibilities of happiness for a portion of security” (Freud, Civilization and Its Discontents, 73).  By living in community, humanity also must sacrifice freedom and tame its natural instincts.  Freud explains

that “If civilization imposes such great sacrifices not only on man’s sexuality but on his aggressivity, we can understand better why it is hard for him to be happy in that civilization” (Freud, Civilization and Its Discontents, 73).  Freud also believes that “the price we pay for our advance in civilization is a loss of happiness through the heightening of the sense of guilt” (Freud, Civilization and Its Discontents, 97).  He believes that guilt is a socially constructed device to control humanity, thus revokes more freedom from civilized people.  The pessimistic view of Freud is that people are unhappy living alone, but will also be unhappy giving up freedoms for civilization.  People living in community can gain security and productivity at the expense of freedom and happiness.  Because of all of the things that Freud believes we gain and lose by living in community, the question arises over whether the benefits outweigh the costs.

People continue to live in community because the advantages of living in community with others are definitely worth the negative consequences.  The benefits gained by civilization sufficiently combat the costs and would provide the best chance for individual happiness. Because suffering and unhappiness will affect human beings whether they are in community or alone, it is better to go through the hardships together and help each other through the pain.  The joys that come from being in relationships with others are far greater than any negative consequences.  Relationships teach us about true love, and there is no greater feeling than helping another person.  The innovation that has developed as a result of humanity’s teamwork

has brought immeasurable vitality to humankind.  Not only has life expectancy increased, but we have also developed things like beautiful infrastructure, amazing technology, and unique culture. Education is also a development of civilization that brings insight, inner joy, and intellectual pursuit that cannot be acquired alone.  To have all of these benefits, one must be willing to release some freedom and tame aggressive instincts.  This is not completely negative, however,

because relinquishing freedom will contribute to the common good, and the tamed instincts would be otherwise destructive.  Negative things like environmental degradation, war, and prejudice also come from civilization.  However, because the benefits of civilization, such as education and technology, can be used to combat the negative aspects, community is worth the costs.  It is impossible to be genuinely happy without experiencing the love of others in community.

Community progression and flourishing depends on the involvement of citizens and the proper utilization of the tools that civilization provides. Both benefits and costs are the inevitable outcome of living in community; therefore, it is important to work towards maximizing the benefits and minimizing the costs.  Freud agrees that people need to work towards this goal, stating that “when, with unsparing criticism, we try to uncover the roots of its imperfection, we are undoubtedly exercising a proper right and are not showing ourselves enemies of civilization” (Freud, Civilization and Its Discontents, 74).  An important thing that can help maximize

benefits and minimize costs is involvement and education.  If people are not ignorant, but instead enlightened about humanity, they can learn to work together for the common good.  Education can make people more empathetic by revealing insight about people’s differences.  Education

can also teach people about the negative effects, such as war and pollution, which can arise from things like technology and religion.  This can prevent people from letting these negative things occur.  Education alone cannot solve the problems of civilization.  There needs to also be involvement, engagement, and motivation.  If society utilizes people’s passions in combination with their talents, motivation to make a change would be the result.  People will work toward progression and human flourishing if they are passionate about it and can see the benefit to the community as a whole.  Religion could also be a tool to maximize benefits and reduce costs

because it provides like-mindedness, reduces selfishness, and allows people to focus on the same ultimate goal.  Education, motivation, and religion are tools that could be very helpful in helping communities evolve and people thrive.  By creating engaged citizens and utilizing beneficial

tools of society, people will become closer to the ideal community.

The ideal community would be composed of citizens who are devoted to the common good, and perfect social justice would be established as a result.  The citizens in an ideal community would exemplify complete selflessness and devotion to the common good.  In order to maintain focus on the common good, citizens should not be greedy or envious:  “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or male or female slave,

or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor” (Exodus 20:17).  This selflessness should include not only material possessions, but also how the citizens love one another:  “’But I say listen, Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those you curse you, pray

for those who abuse you’” (Luke 6:27-8). This sort of unselfish love would create a community of cooperation and unity.  If citizens live by the saying “’Do to others as you would have them do to you,’” peace and harmony would be established in the civilization (Luke 6:31).  An ideal

community would be composed of morally sound people because “’No good tree bears bad fruit, nor again does a bad tree bear good fruit’” (Luke 6:43).  Moral soundness could be maintained

by a shared moral vision and genuine devotion to the common good.

Perfect social justice would also be established in the ideal community.  This justice would mean guaranteed dignity, value, and equality for every human being.  All laws and institutions in an ideal community would reflect this emphasis on human worth and equality in order to maintain justice.  As Martin Luther King Jr. puts it, “Any law that uplifts human personality is just.  Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.  All segregation statutes

are unjust because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality.  It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority” (King, “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” 5).  In the ideal community, people would also be focused more on existential than superficial things:  “I have a dream that my four children will one day

live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character” (King, “I Have a Dream Speech,” 3).  Justice would be possible if people put

judgment to the grave and focused on the important qualities of people. The ideal community would also use education to destroy ignorance and encourage understanding and social justice among citizens.  Educated, selfless people would create the foundation for a perfect, just community.

Plato’s community, Kallipolis, in his book The Republic exemplifies many aspects of an ideal community.  For example, happiness is defined in Kallipolis as seeing the city flourish and working towards the good of the whole.  The law is not trying “to make any one class in the city outstandingly happy but to contrive to spread happiness throughout the city by bringing the citizens into harmony with each other” (Plato, The Republic, 191-2).  Also, the rulers of Kallipolis receive education and training that makes them very well equipped for the job.  The people who do not want to rule are in charge, “for if they don’t, the lovers of it, who are rivals, will fight over it” (Plato, The Republic, 193).  The selfless government of Kallipolis extols wisdom and virtue, and its sole goal is the good of the community.  Specialization in Kallipolis makes sure that everyone’s strengths are being best utilized, and working towards a common goal promotes equality and like-mindedness.  The rulers exhibit the virtue of wisdom, the guardians display courage, and the producers show moderation.  With these three virtues working together in harmony, Kallipolis shines the fourth virtue of justice.  Plato’s imagined

community comes close to resembling an ideal community; however, this is not a plausible achievement.

The perfect community is not possible and perfect social justice can never be fully achieved because of evil side of human nature.  Even an optimist would have to admit that human nature, although mostly good, has a destructive side.  Community is a collection of humans, and a collection of imperfect things can never form a holy, impeccable structure.  It is also said that everything constructed must inevitably fall.  Because civilization is a human constructed institution, it can never be flawless and will eventually fall to ruin.  This has been proven countless times in history when powerful civilizations always come to an end.  A perfect community is also impossible because the presence of any injustice taints the entire community. According to Martin Luther King Jr., “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.  We are caught in an inescapable network of mutuality, tied in a single garment of destiny.  Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly” (King, “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” 1).  Because humanity is connected, unless every form of injustice is completely eradicated, a perfect community can never exist.

Although a perfect community is not fully possible, people should never stop striving for this ideal.  Steps can definitely be taken to approach a perfect community.  Human nature is malleable and should be constantly evaluated for personal growth and improvement.  The moment humans stop striving for perfection, all innovation will cease.  Progress is the result of commitment to bettering oneself and one’s surroundings.  People should relentlessly strive for justice until it becomes a reality:  “No, no we are not satisfied and we will not be satisfied until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream” (King, “I Have a Dream Speech,” 3).  If humanity does not strive for this, dystopian communities could result.

Sometimes dystopias are nearly impossible to prevent because of uncontrollable environmental conditions and the power of fear.  When this happens, the citizens of the community must resist because oppressors will never freely give up their power:  “We know through painful experience that freedom is never voluntarily given by the oppressor; it must be demanded by the oppressed” (King, “Letter from a Birmingham Jail,” 3).  Even in the darkest of dystopias, there is hope for resistance and that freedom and dignity can again be asserted.  The hope of internal revolution in Oceania seems to be ruled out as because “its enemies, if it had enemies, had no way of coming together or even identifying one another” (Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four, 71).  Also, outside invasion seems almost impossible because “the fact that there is no danger of conquest makes possible the denial of reality which is the special feature of Ingsoc and its rival systems of thought” (Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four, 202).  Secret organizations do give some hope of resistance in Oceania and Gilead.  The “legendary Brotherhood” was assembled in Oceania, but “it was inconceivable that its members could ever assemble on larger numbers than twos and threes” (Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four, 71).  The “Mayday” organization also gives hope to Offred in Gilead, but the reader never knows how successful the organization is.  The reader never gets to find out how Oceania or Gilead fell to ruin. The reader can only see the personal resistance strategies of the oppressed individuals.

Individual resistance comes in many forms and can help ensure that communities do not become dystopias.  One way to resist dystopian conditions is simply by making sure one’s story is heard.  Offred argues, “By telling you anything at all I’m at least believing in you, I believe you’re there, I believe you into being.  Because I’m telling you this story I will your existence.  I tell, therefore you are” (Atwood, The Handmaid’s Tale, 268).  By educating others about the dystopian conditions, the narrator is ensuring that his or her story is not forgotten or overlooked,

which will ideally prevent the dystopian conditions from returning in the future.  Individuals can also resist in subtle, sneaky ways by evading the control of the rulers.  Remaining mentally conscious or preforming hidden illegal acts are methods of resistance.  In Oceania, sex is a form of resistance against the Party:  “The sexual act, successfully performed, was rebellion.  Desire was thoughtcrime” (Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four, 70).  Julia prefers these small acts of rebellion, causing Winston to call her “only a rebel from the waist downwards” (Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four, 291).  Winston, on the other hand, prefers mass rebellion for the sake of all of humanity.  The consciousness of mind is also a form of resistance in both Oceania and Gilead.  Winston says of the Party, “To die hating them, that was freedom” (Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four, 291).  Similarly, Offred finds the phrase “Nolite te bastardes carborundorum” written on the floor, which means “Do not let the bastards grind you down” (Atwood, The Handmaid’s Tale, 52).  This quote urges people to not allow those in power to control them and have the final say.  If people do not let society overtake their mind, they have internally resisted and will die mentally free.  This will only bring individual success and will not produce change in the dystopia as a whole.  Individual success, however, is better than no resistance at all and can encourage others to do the same.  Regarding the society of Gilead, the historian notes, “Our job is not the censure but to understand” (Atwood, The Handmaid’s Tale, 302).  When learning about dystopias, one should not judge the society, but instead learn from it.  This is one of the reasons why it is so important to study history—so that bad things do not repeat themselves.

To ensure that communities do not become dystopias, people need to maintain both individuality and unity.  Individuality guarantees that rulers cannot have the final say or the complete power of conformity.  Unity is also essential in preventing oppression.  King notes, “But whenever the slaves get together, something happens in Pharaoh’s court, and he cannot

hold the slaves in slavery.  When the slaves get together, that’s the beginning of getting out of slavery.  Now let us maintain unity” (King, “I See the Promised Land,” 2).  People in community must be committed to sticking together and the betterment of the whole in order to prevent dystopian conditions from arising.

Faith, doubt, and reason can also play an important role in avoiding dystopian societies and striving for the ideal community by promoting a discerning and engaged mind set among citizens. Faith, doubt, and reason play a key role in the potential resistance to dystopias. If people realize the true meaning of faith as “ultimate concern,” they will be less likely to submit to the idolatrous faiths of dystopian communities and allow the ideology to control their

minds.  Also, resistance will be possible if people utilize their ability to doubt and reason.  Doubt ensures genuine faith, and reason creates engaged citizens.  People should constantly doubt those in power and hold them accountable for their actions.  By logically thinking through the societal conditions using reason, people will stay motivated and engaged to make a change.  Resistance

in dystopias develops through questioning, staying engaged, and maintaining individuality.  All of these result from education on the purpose of faith, doubt, and reason.

Understanding the true meaning of faith ensures that a community is not focused on idolatrous ideals but instead on a common existential emphasis.  An ideal community holds a common understanding of faith.  In his book entitled Dynamics of Faith, Paul Tillich summarizes faith as “the act of unconditional, infinite and ultimate concern” (Tillich, Dynamics of Faith, 10). Taking a stand for the existential involves having a “passion for the infinite” (Tillich, Dynamics of Faith, 11).  This passion requires sacrifice and surrender of a person’s whole being.

According to Tillich, faith can be described as “an act of the total personality” (Tillich,

Dynamics of Faith, 5) and “the most centered act of the human mind” (Tillich, Dynamics of

Faith, 4).  This view of faith is very different from the view held by most communities and could establish much more tolerance for religion and diversity within communities.

Doubt is an essential part of faith and is very important in preventing the emergence of a dystopia.  Clifford writes that “it is wrong, always, everywhere, and for anyone, to believe anything upon insufficient evidence” (Clifford, “The Ethics of Belief,” 5).  Everyone owes it to mankind to investigate his or her beliefs, and no one “can escape the universal duty of questioning all that we believe” (Clifford, “The Ethics of Belief,” 4).  Through investigation and questioning, people can check the power of those in charge and prevent brainwashing.  René Descartes’ Meditations also proposes a unique way of approaching doubt that can prevent a dystopia from forming.  Descartes argues, “But reason now persuades me that I should withhold my assent no less carefully from opinions that are not completely certain and indubitable than I would from those that are patently false” (Descartes, Meditations, 13).  Descartes decides to doubt everything because he realizes that he has believed false things in the past and wants to determine what he can know with absolute certainty.  Because so many things are unreliable and have let him down in the past, Descartes decides to implement methodic doubt and discard anything that can be doubted:  “I will accomplish this by putting aside everything that admits of the least doubt, as if I had discovered it to be completely false” (Descartes, Meditations, 17). Through this extreme doubting, citizens can explore every aspect of their community and be sure that they believe in its ideals.  By tearing everything down with doubt, people can use reason to build up and strive for an ideal community.

Reason is an important aspect of continually striving for perfection.  Tillich describes two types of reason: technical reason and existential reason.  Technical reason is used “in the sense of scientific method, logical strictness and technical calculation” and “gives the tools for