Friday, January 14, 2011
ending post
All in all, given the rights of life, health, liberty, and possessions, humans will survive and strive in any non-geographically life threatening environment. Humans would treat each other well, and do things to better the people rather than harm them. They would not knowingly do things to cause destruction in the society. Humans are naturally good when given their rights because mentally all they need is their rights. Why need anything else?
Thursday, January 13, 2011
locke thoughts 3
"Philosophies of leadership are determined by beliefs about human nature.
A leader will change his leadership type with his different views of the people. For example, say you start out at a new school and everyone is new to each other. Everyone treats each other as equals, but as the year goes on they learn more about each other and treat others differently than others because of their views on the others. I think this is true, and just because Locke has a good philosophy on everyone getting god given rights doesn’t mean it has anything to do with everyone being entitled to a certain judgment of other people. Basically he never says anything on thinking differently of other people, so no matter what line of power they are in or how low they are on the a scale of power you can think of them in whichever way you’d like.
"The governed have a responsibility for their governance."
The people under government need to take responsibility for their government. So basically if your teacher tries to get your class in trouble for something they didn’t do, they pretty much take responsibility for what their teachers said they did. In my opinion I think this is fair, because the teacher is the leader and as long as the teacher still lets them have their rights, they should be able to handle there punishment.
"Human Nature does not determine our actions,: it inclines us towards us towards certain actions."
People aren’t bad just because the people around them are bad, but the people around them will influence their decisions. So you’re in school and you get bugged for doing something they don’t like you doing but you should be doing, for example something like homework. You will still do it, but their input on it will get you to think of the different pros and cons of doing it. This is definitely a possible situation one would get into. My thinker Locke would definitely agree with this scenario because he only wants to make sure one has there rights, and he knows that there will be people that will try to mess with you or deny you these rights, but he expects you to go about the situation in a manor that doesn’t deny anyone of their rights or harm another.
A leader will change his leadership type with his different views of the people. For example, say you start out at a new school and everyone is new to each other. Everyone treats each other as equals, but as the year goes on they learn more about each other and treat others differently than others because of their views on the others. I think this is true, and just because Locke has a good philosophy on everyone getting god given rights doesn’t mean it has anything to do with everyone being entitled to a certain judgment of other people. Basically he never says anything on thinking differently of other people, so no matter what line of power they are in or how low they are on the a scale of power you can think of them in whichever way you’d like.
"The governed have a responsibility for their governance."
The people under government need to take responsibility for their government. So basically if your teacher tries to get your class in trouble for something they didn’t do, they pretty much take responsibility for what their teachers said they did. In my opinion I think this is fair, because the teacher is the leader and as long as the teacher still lets them have their rights, they should be able to handle there punishment.
"Human Nature does not determine our actions,: it inclines us towards us towards certain actions."
People aren’t bad just because the people around them are bad, but the people around them will influence their decisions. So you’re in school and you get bugged for doing something they don’t like you doing but you should be doing, for example something like homework. You will still do it, but their input on it will get you to think of the different pros and cons of doing it. This is definitely a possible situation one would get into. My thinker Locke would definitely agree with this scenario because he only wants to make sure one has there rights, and he knows that there will be people that will try to mess with you or deny you these rights, but he expects you to go about the situation in a manor that doesn’t deny anyone of their rights or harm another.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
locke blog 2: ending of lord of the flies and sudanese thoughts
From what I know about my thinker and whilst I’m thinking in the way of my thinker, to me it made perfect sense when all of the boys obeyed and followed jack and tried to chase Ralph off the island. I say this because the boys were all good at the beginning, they all listened to Ralph, but when Jack came into the picture and provided more opportunities to have fun and kill things, of course the boys would trade in their power to do these things. And when all of the boys went over to Jack and left the leadership of Ralph, they became uncontrollable and did savage and uncalled for things. They acted in this manor because jack gave them no rights, and without rights the boys were wild, and uncontrollable, but with Ralph they were usually calm and easy to handle because Ralph gave them rights.
View on the Sudanese boys:
The way the boys reacted to having to move worked perfectly with Locke’s philosophy for so many reasons. The boys were by themselves and had no one to turn to. Given their rights they didn’t need to steal to better themselves and they helped each other. In my opinion this is the reason why they made it so far. This proves Locke’s philosophy because the boys did exactly what Locke would think they’d do and many survived.
View on the Sudanese boys:
The way the boys reacted to having to move worked perfectly with Locke’s philosophy for so many reasons. The boys were by themselves and had no one to turn to. Given their rights they didn’t need to steal to better themselves and they helped each other. In my opinion this is the reason why they made it so far. This proves Locke’s philosophy because the boys did exactly what Locke would think they’d do and many survived.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
human's have natural rights
People are all originally good and all people bestow god-given rights such as life, health, liberty, and possessions. When people are denied even one these rights by another human, they may not take it well, and may tick. For example if our government were to take our possessions for whatever reason, we'd get pretty mad. People need a government that will provide and do good things for them, if the government won't do these things it's people would riot, people would get hurt, and everyone would hate each other because everyone would be fighting. People are all naturally good, it's other people that take their rights away that cause them to be bad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)