If dystopia helps to scare us into working harder
I see the vision. However, I still think this is naive. It's the same reason (in my opinion) why we have all this literature on racism, how to solve it, and make institutionalized racism better but it isn't better. It's really not about the message, it's about who is reading the message, are they reading the message correctly, and are they willing to change.
Anti-utopias are the anti, saying that the idea of utopia itself is wrong and bad, and thatany attempt to try to make things better is sure to wind up making things worse,
I think this is extreme. If the utopia is a political order that could be run better but the anti utopia is saying any attempt to make things better only makes them worst. What is the point then...
On the other hand, there is a real feeling being expressed in them, a real sense of fear
Yes. How does this relate to our world and what can we do so that we do not become like this.
s nowhere near as bad as the ones these poor characters are suffering through
I think this is naive. If you aren't seeing the real message behind the system then you are not reading the dystopia correctly.
m. Dystopia is very clearly a kind of satir
Here comes this idea again, that both Utopias and Dystopias are using satire to make a point about something in society.
shared future; utopiasexpress our social hopes, dystopias our social fears.
I remember listening to the micro lecture that stated that both the utopian and dystopian system all gravitate towards a homeostasis like level. If our utopian society are so perfect that they are flawed and our dystopian society is so flawed that we can use it for satirical purposed, what does that say about our feelings about the shared future?
The practice of placing individuals under “observation” is a natural extension of a justice imbued with disciplinary methods and examination procedures.
Would this system still work if the tall buildings were replaces with one giant camera? Also, why couldn't it be the fact that these prisoners dont have access to other prisoners as well as they are being watched that is keeping them in check?
The plague-stricken town provided an exceptional disciplinary model: perfect, but absolutely violent; to the disease that brought death, power opposed its perpetual threat of death; life inside it was reduced to its simplest expression; it was, against the power of death, the meticulous exercise of the right of the sword. The Panopticon, on the other hand, has a role of amplification; although it arranges power, although it is intended to make it more economic and more effective, it does so not for power itself, nor for the immediate salvation of a threatened society:
Why is this?? Both use control tacts to further behavioral submission.
Because it is possible to intervene at any moment and because the constant pressure acts even before the offences, mistakes or crimes have been committed. Because, in these conditions, its strength is that it never intervenes, it is exercised spontaneously and without noise, it constitutes a mechanism whose effects follow from one another.
It allows those in question to police themselves. Had there been another building made like this?
tion in which he simultaneously plays both roles; he becomes the principle of his own subjection. By this very fact, the external power may throw off its physical weight; it tends to the non-corporal; and, the more it approaches th
I wonder how this plays into recidivism.
there were no more bars, no more chains, no more heavy locks;
Is this better?
Visible: the inmate will constantly have before his eyes the tall outline of the central tower from which he is spied upon. Unverifiable: the inmate must never know whether he is being looked at at any one moment; but he must be sure that he may always be so.
This is a wonderfully diabolic method of control. Never knowing whether or not you are being watched will definitely change the behavior. I wonder what would happen if the guards stopped working. Would the people in question still work?
He is seen, but he does not see; he is the object of information, never a subject in communication.
Wow. This is genius.
normal and the abnormal
I wonder what is Americas "normal". White heterosexual males that are middle class.
Treat “lepers” as “plague victims”, project the subtle segmentations of discipline onto the confused space of internment, combine it with the methods of analytical distribution proper to power, individualize the excluded, but use procedures of individualization to mark exclusion —
This is a mind blowing concept because it has worked for so long. The categorization of people for personal gain and control.
all this constitutes a compact model of the disciplinary mechanism. The plague is met by order; its function is to sort out every possible confusion:
Asking the class, how do y'all feel about this statement? "The plague is met by order" do you think that is the best way to handle a pandemic? Is it more efficient? Does order have to mean lack of empathy?
Each family will have made its own provisions; but, for bread and wine, small wooden canals are set up between the street and the interior of the houses, thus allowing each person to receive his ration without communicating with the suppliers and other residents; meat, fish and herbs will be hoisted up into the houses with pulleys and baskets.
This opening sounds a lot like how COVID was handled. A little less barbaric but similar concepts.
The notions of right and wrong, justice and injustice,have there no place.
So the reason we have government, right and wrong, is because we live in a society where each man wants to be at war with their fellow man because they want something they can't both have?
; when going to sleep, he locks his doors; wheneven in his house, he locks his chests; and this when he knows there be lawsand public officers armed to revenge all injuries shall be done him; what opinionhe has of his fellow-subjects when he rides armed; of his fellow-citizens, whenhe locks his doors; and of his children and servants, when he locks his chests.Does he not there as much accuse mankind by his actions as I do by mywords?
These are valid points. Why do we do this?
they are in that condition which is called war, and such awar as is of every man against every man
So Hobbes is saying that unless they have a common enemy, men will be at war with each other.... is this an unconscious war?
diffidence
--> modesty or shyness resulting from a lack of self-confidence.
How does this contribute to a person defending themself? Maybe appearing to be less threatening to people around so that they can over power their competition? Let me know what yall think.
ere there is no power able to overawe them al
Men (people) want to be surrounded by people that see them the way they see themselves which makes sense but the first part about them not wanting to keep company where there is no power is confusing.... oh wait maybe it's just saying men want to hang out with men like them... so they don't feel threatened..... you know the more I read these works of literature the more I think maybe they are for men because a lot of this sounds like male ego.
that is, by force or wiles to master thepersons of all men he can so long till he see no other power great enough toendanger him;
How in the world does one do that??
ariseth
This is just a fancy way of saying arise :)
two men desire the same thing which nevertheless theycannot both enjoy,
I wonder if this is a reference to Freud's text. Is Hobbes generalizing this statement or simply referring to women and land? I don't disagree with this statement, when two people want something they both can't have they soon become enemies.
prudence
prudent --> acting with or showing care and thought for the future.
wise as themselves,
What is the definition of wisdom here and how does is not include wit, eloquence, or intelligence? Maybe this is saying because everyone has their own experiences, one man has more wisdom with himself and his experiences than another man with his experiences? Let me know if that made sense... I put on my philosophy hat for a second.
mes manifestly stronger in body orof quicker mind than another,
I understand this paragraph to mean all men are equal so that no matter if you are the strongest, if you are smart and use your resources you can beat the strongest. I don't know if this applied vice versa...
Felicity
Intense happiness
he present cultural state of America would give us agood opportunity for studying the damage to civilization which is thus to be feared. But I shall avoid thetemptation of entering upon a critique of American civilization;
This is an interesting last statement. I wonder how he thinks America compares and why it's so easy to study the damage to civilization here.
Since everyone's needs would be satisfied
This assumes that everyone wants power and aggression comes from that lack of power. But what about the people who are rich, have it all, and still commit crimes, are hostile, and unhappy?
In order for these aims to be fulfilled, a restriction upon sexual life isunavoidable.
I agree that it is unavoidable, but what if everyone had this love for each other? Not just I have to find something in you that I value to give you my love, but general altruism.
One is probably justified in assuming that its importance as asource of feelings of happiness, and therefore in the fulfilment of our aim in life, has sensiblydiminished.
All these restrictions have left us feeling unhappy and unsatisfied.
I agree with that he is saying. Society has so many unspoken do's and dont's and for what? Shunning and shamming people for doing something that is deviant from the "norm" even if it does nothing to the other person.
object is restricted to the opposite sex, and most extra-genital satisfactionsare forbidden as perversions.
Homosexual sex is forbidden, and Heterosexual sex must be legitimize and monogamous... That is, in a "perfect" society but you cant control people.
A love that does notdiscriminate seems to me to forfeit a part of its own value, by doing an injustice to its object; andsecondly, not all men are worthy of love
I understand this too. You can't give your love to everyone because with love comes resources and sacrifices.
ALSO, yeah.. not every man/woman/person is worthy of love.
himself dependent in a mostdangerous way on a portion of the external world, namely, his chosen love-object, a
I actually understand this. Being in love will make you do stupid things and in a world where you need to make smart choices to survive love might not be the most beneficial thing. BUT, on the other hand , falling in love, having a family, all have their benefits too.
genital erotism
I want to give Freud the benefit of the doubt here and say "genital erotism" is synonymous to the highest form of fulfillment. I don't think he is speaking only from a sexual mindset. I am choosing to believe Freud is saying something deeper.
sexual object -the woman -and made thewoman unwilling to be deprived of the part of herself which had been separated off from her -her child.
This is an interesting concept. Both the man and woman stayed for different reasons but for their evolutionary benefit.
. With every tool man is perfecting his own organs, whethermotor or sensory, or is removing the limits to their functioning
This is interesting. Yes these tools have helped our civilization grow and develop but no matter how much knowledge we have, I just keep thinking we can never beat nature... maybe that is where the unhappiness comes from.
'cheap enjoyment'
I'm trying to read this article with a devil's advocate mindset. ... I kind of agree with him here. We take pleasure in cleaning up messes we have made and we solve problems that lead to old solutions.
cultural ideals
Is this referring to working? Creating? Society? What is cultural ideals referring to??
ed to pr
The more knowledge he have, the more problems. I think this is an interesting concept. Knowledge, and awareness, have always been given mixed "reviews" in literature. Specifically referring to the text in the Bible and philosophical teachings.
it points the direction for our activity. If we cannot remove allsuffering, we can remove some, and we can mitigate some
I read this and thought about humanities inability to deal with their fate. The ongoing fight that humanity has with nature: how to stop the inevitable.
"The presence of any of these five conditions is sufficient fro calling a group oppressed." As a Black woman reading this I recognized all of them in society today. Wow. How do we get better.
The idea of Cultural Imperialism is confusing me, but I think I am over complicating it. If someone could kindly explain their interpretation that would be appreciated.
I wonder who is really reading these works of literature... Often times the people who NEED to read these works are the ones that have no clue works like this even exist... that is why the systems never change.
■
I don't really love what she is saying... maybe how she is saying it. Structural oppression is the result of "well-meaning people... normal processes of everyday life". I don't think she meant to sound insensitive or detached but this is how it read for me and I don't like the assumption that these people are well meaning because they often are not.
■
hith·er·to /ˌhiT͟Hərˈto͞o/ Learn to pronounce adverb until now or until the point in time under discussion.
I'm still confused.
■
I wonder what made the author choose this order "women, Blacks, Chicanos...and mentally disabled."
temble caricature of obedience.
Oppression defined as comedic obedience is interesting... What did y'all think about this?
Someone who does not see a pane of glass does not know that he does not s
These two sentences spoke volumes to me.
I recently spoke with my friend about the O.J. Simpson court case. In my cultural psychology class our textbook mentioned the opposite reactions of the Black and White community after the verdict was read. As the Black community celebrated finally getting a judicial win, the White community was outraged by the flawed justice system. How could they let a Black man free after allegedly killing a White woman? The system must have been rigged. This system that has put away so many innocent Black and Brown men and women and let so many obviously guilty White people free has always been rigged. The point I'm making is, yes, no one notices something is wrong until it (negatively) impacts them. That is the problem with America today. We LACK empathy and understanding.
Apologies if I offended anyone.