The ownership of private wealth gives the individual power, and with it thetemptation to ill-treat his neighbour;
i agree that one has ownership of something that someone else does not have, they tend to feel like they are better than people who are without.
women soon come into opposition to civilization and display their retarding andrestraining influence
i feel likewomen helped civilization because they made up for some of the thing most men in this time lacked
sexual (genital)love afforded him the strongest experiences of satisfaction, and in fact provided him with the prototypeof all happiness, must have suggested to him that he should continue to seek the satisfaction
you can tell freud was pretty hyper sexual if he thought that it was the basis of all happiness
keeping the female, or, speaking more generally, his sexual objects, nearhim; while the female, who did not want to be separated from her helpless young, was obliged, in theirinterests, to remain with the stronger male.
although i see what he means, i see where the sexism from our lecture comes in.
that is, that will bring happiness -between this claim of the individual and the cultural claims of the group; and one of the problems thattouches the fate of humanity is whether such an accommodation can be reached by means of someparticular form of civilization or whether this conflict is irreconcilable.
i think this plays into the fact that because everyones needs are different, that in a civilization it is impossible to make everyone happy, you can only please the majority.
The last, but certainly not the least important, of the characteristic features of civilization remains to beassessed: the manner in which the relationships of men to one another, their social relationships, areregulated
I think it is crazy how men in these times talk about how it is to live by the rules society created for them when they quite literally created the patriarchy and their own gender roles.
and will increase man's likeness to God still more. But in the interests of ourinvestigations, we will not forget that present-day man does not feel happy in his Godlike character.
this relates to the idea that desire is the root of unhappiness. no matter how many advancements in tech that we manke, we still have the desire to make something new or better. we are never actually content with what we have, we just simply long for the next thing.
With every tool man is perfecting his own organs, whethermotor or sensory, or is removing the limits to their functioning.
i love that he ties what he says earlier about human limitation being a reason for unhappiness and expands on how humans to to make up for that by creating gadgets to make up for our shortcomings.
f there had been no railway to conquer distances, my child wouldnever have left his native town and I should need no telephone to hear has voice; if travelling across theocean by ship had not been introduced, my friend would not have embarked on his sea-voyage and Ishould not need a cable to relieve my anxiety about him
i was thinking about all of the tech advancements and quite literally thought about how great it is to track your friends and stuff and this gave me a different perspective. its like every new good thing has a bad side effect.
but a factor of this land hostile to civilization must already have been at work in the victory ofChristendom over the heathen religions
i think since so many people are christian now, people forget how christianity was forced upon many civilizations and people after were taught/ forced to follow. religion being forced on people creates a bad structure for any civilization and can lead to rebellion later
when we consider howunsuccessful we have been in precisely this field of prevention of suffering, a suspicion dawns on us thathere, too, a piece of unconquerable nature may lie behind -this time a piece of our own psychicalconstitution.
this is an interesting take on how people veiw suffering because it is different once we realize that we all play a part in human suffering.
inadequacy of the regulations which adjust the mutual relationships of human beings inthe family, the state and society
i am not entirely sure what he means by this. does he mean peoples lack of boundaries? or does he mean the laws/ rules of society as a whole
page 59. I think in one way or another each of the 5 topics are interconnected. some may be be an effect of one another.
page 57. "violence is a social practice." is a very true statement. normalizing this brings to mind the argument that bystanders are not innocent. They are quite literally silently telling people it is ok or like the reading says, it's like people just expect it. This should not be normalized.
page 54. the author starts to talk about cultural imperialism and making the dominant groups traits the norm. This plays a huge role in how oppression is so exclusionary. Setting one group as the norm inevitably creates a sense of exclusion and not belonging which is a one of the biggest emotional factors when dealing with oppression in my opinion.
page 49. " Marginalization is perhaps the most dangerous form of oppression." Until I read this I thought powerlessness was the most dangerous because this mindset is what perpetuates the cycle of oppression. But this helped me see that marginalization is dangerous because of deprivation. As oppressed people we do not even have the resources to succeed which brings up the idea of pull yourself up by the bootstraps
page 47. I think that the instiitutional structure of the patriarchal family is where a lot of the sexist ideas are born. the subtly reinforce a lot of stereotypes about both men and women.
Because othei"s identify them as a group, they are excluded and despised. Eliminating oppression thus requires eliminating groups
I only agree with this to a certain extent. I feel like eliminating groups would eliminate the sense of comfort and community that people feel when they have shared experiences with one another. I also feel that this similar to the "I don't see color" phrase because it doesn't acknowledge that my culture and people are here and we are different and some ways. I think it needs to be a conversation of acceptance vs toloerance, and we need to understand how to truly be accepting instead of eliminating groups
Groups, on the other hand, constitute individuals. A person's particularsense of history, affinity, and separateness, even the person's mode of reasoning, evaluating, and expressing feeling, are constituted partly by her or hisgroup affinities.
I agree with this because after taking multiple psychology classes I realized the importance of how people's enviorment and situations really effect the way the person turned out. This is why development is such a heavily researched topic and everyone wants to get some idea of how much some thing actually affect you.
bourgeois ideology.
is this ideology based off of a person, or a certain event?
page 39. I liked that she categorized the term oppression in 5 concepts in make a definition or exploring it. some people do not know the difference between oppression and micro aggressions. Having to spot and ask does certain thing fit under the category will help people understand what the term actually represents.
A major political project for those of us who identify with at least one ofthese movements must thus be to persuade people that the discourse of oppr�ss10n makes sense of much of our social experience. We are ill prepared forthis �ask, ho�ever, because we have no clear account of the meaning of oppression
this quote spoke volumes because no one talks about how we can better understand how to actually define these terms to fully and correctly explain our experiences as oppressed people. I think people regurgitate what other people tell them instead of trying to understand concepts for themselves or dig deeper into the topics.