Man Was Born Free but Is Everywhere in Chains - Essay Example

? “Man was born free but is everywhere in chains.” Discuss this phrase, with reference to key concepts This paper aims at analyzing the concepts of power, identity, insecurity and inequality. This paper will consolidate the arguments and ideas of various authors so as to expound on the study topic The Concept of Freedom, Identity and Insecurity According to Chaurasia, “Man was born free but is everywhere in chains.” Man is born free in the sense that freedom is an inherent right. Freedom is essential for the development of various human personalities. Thus, man is born for freedom and should be free. The statement “but he is in chains” means that the societal customs and state regulation imposed upon humans unnecessarily restrain them from development since birth. Human beings also enters into social bonds, develop civilization and this makes them lose liberty (Chaurasia 2001, p. 308) Fromm (2001, p. 18-29) observes that freedom is what characterizes human existence. It changes as man gains awareness as an independent and separate being. Mans’ social history has its beginning from the interaction with nature to awareness as a separate entity from the surrounding nature and other human beings. The individual continued to be closely tied to the social and the natural world. Man also felt the world surrounding him. The processes of the emergence of the individual from nature and social world reached its peak in the modern era in the centuries between the reformation and the present. Fromm likens this to the same process, which is found in the history of man. Before a child is born, it is one with the mother. The child becomes a separate entity from the biological mother after birth. This separation marks the beginning of individuation. The child remains with the mother for only a considerable period. Fromm states figuratively that a child lacks freedom before it is born. However, the tie with the mother provides security and a feeling of belonging to the child. This is what he refers to primary ties. These ties are organic and constitute part and parcel of human development. The ties imply lack of individuality, but they provide an individual with security and orientation. The primary ties connect the individual with the mother and society in general. Once an individual completes his first stage of individuation, he is faced with a new task. This task is to orient and establish himself in the world and look for security in other ways similar to those before the pre-individualistic existence. This makes freedom to assume a different meaning to the one he had before individuation (Fromm 2001, p. 18-29). Fromm explains this by the analysis of the development of an infant. He says the independence of the foetus from the infants ends at birth. However, the dependence does not end here. The mother takes care of the child. With time, the child begins to identify that the mother and other entities are separate. The child through its own initiatives experiences the world. This marks a crucial point in the development of individuation. The process of individuation is advanced by education. This process is marked by frustrations and prohibition, which change the role of the mother as a hostile and dangerous person. This antagonism between the mother and child helps in the development of the self. The different authorities the child interacts with constitute the child’s universe and submit to the child. This has a different quality from that which exists when an individual separate complete from these authorities (Fromm 2001, p. 18-29). The freedom of a child during childhood enables him to develop and express his identity. This gives him security and reassurance. The increasing separation from these authorities results into isolation, which creates intense anxiety and insecurity. The child may develop the inner strength or a new kind of solidarity and closeness with others. If the process of separation and individuation are matched with the growth of the self, the child develops harmoniously. This does not happen in most cases. The process of individuation occurs automatically while the development of self is hampered for social or individual reasons. The delay between the two trends causes unbearable feeling of isolation and powerlessness. This leads to psychic mechanism or the mechanism of escape (Fromm 2001, p. 18-29). Fromm notes that the history of man is characterized by the development of individuation and freedom. Individuals emerge from the pre-human stage by trying to be free from their coercive instincts. Instincts are inherited biologically. Animals that existed in the early periods of development are in close relationship with nature. All their activities are controlled by instincts and reflex actions mechanism. This is a common feature of all insects whose social organization relies entirely on instincts. In contrast, Individuals found in the present periods of development are less dependent on instinctive action pattern. They are more flexible and less complete structurally at birth. Their development reaches its peak with the full development of an individual and his identity. This can be captured from the word by Fromm “His adaptation to nature is based essentially on the process of learning, not instinctual determination. Instinct is a diminishing if not on disappearing category in higher animal forms, especially in humans” (Fromm 2001, p. 18-29) The existence of humans begins when the limitation of action is exceeded by instincts to a certain level and nature loses its coercive character. Before man loses the coercion of instincts, his existence and freedom are inseparable. The freedom being addressed is negative freedom (freedom from), as opposed to positive freedom (freedom to). The negative freedom is the freedom from instinctive determination of human actions.The negative freedom mentioned above is an ambiguous gift for humans. This is because individuals are born without the urge to take appropriate action, which animals possess. Individuals at birth are cared for by parents. The responses of humans to the surroundings are less effective and quick than the instinctive actions, which are automatically generated. Humans suffer from fear and the dangerous society they live in. However, all this danger, fears and helplessness serve to boost the development of individual’s identity (Sapru, 2012). In the process of developing, individuals are confronted with choices to make from various courses of actions. In humans, the chain of action is continuous as opposed to those of animals which are uninterrupted. Individuals do not rely on instinctive actions, but have to make a decision by evaluating different course of actions. As individuals interact with nature, he separates from it. He becomes aware of himself or the society and begins to look at nature and the individual as not being identical. An individual also becomes aware of death as inevitable. This causes fear and insecurity to increase Fromm 2001, p. 18-29). Fromm concludes that the process of developing the freedom in an individual is synonymous with the process individual growth. Freedom also involves the growing of strengths being able to integrate in the society and develop solidarity with other human beings. It also means the development of the mastery of nature and the increase in power of reasoning. On the other hand, development of the self means an increase in isolation, insecurity and development of doubt about human roles in the universe and the importance of life. With all this doubts, an individual becomes powerless and insignificance (Fromm p. 18-29). The Concept of social inequality Social inequality refers to the graduated dimension, bounded categories, vertical classification or hierarchical relations, which differentiate human beings in society. The concept of social inequality is used interchangeably with concepts such as social class, social stratification, power, socio-economic status, privileges, cumulative advantage, dependence and dominance. Social inequality is crucial in the analysis of social systems (O’rand, 2012). Social inequality as a graduated dimension means it is a distributional phenomenon. The first assumption made is that inequality is generated by how valued traits are distributed among individuals. This has to do with regular differences in power, goods, services and privileges. The second assumption views inequality as a system of property that is characterized by individual levels differences, which are derivative than generative. Distribution such as the system size and its overall volume of resources is viewed as higher level of aggregation. This is with reference to the determining of the general level of inequality across systems and without making reference to individual differences (O’rand, 2012). The two assumptions made above approach inequality as measurable at the level of individual actors in a system. The economic and political inequality is caused by the distribution and redistribution of “congenital abilities.” The congenital abilities have been valued within society’s social systems. Social mobility and inequality also emerged from congenital abilities (O’rand, 2012). Social inequality results from the differential distribution of social rewards to individuals on the basis of individuals relative achievements of ranked social positions. Education attainment mediates the process of integrated social mobility among people in society. The prominent theories on the distribution of inequality are founded on the rationalization of authority, macro views on division of labor, and the distribution of economic as well as social rewards in industrial societies. Marx Weber in the theory of economic organization argued that capitalistic systems of power, property and prestige developed out of changing systems of money economies and accounting. This system emerged from rationalized systems of social control. Social inequality in industrial society emerged from economic and social aspects and produced the multidimensional basis of inequality. These dimensions are class, status and parties. Inequalities emerge functionally and are brought about by increasing differentiation of the social system as they move to rational authority from the socially illegitimate systems of force or economic dominance (O’rand, 2012). Distributional inequality is concerned with more than one dimension of individual socio-economic outcomes. It also focuses on social patterns of inequality at the macro level of society. The parameters of social structure including inequality and heterogeneity intersect to limit and cause differentiation in an individual’s income as well as their outcomes and motivation. The nominal and graduated parameters create different systems or population. These systems or population have differentiated distributional properties that cannot be reduced to the initial individual source. The indicators of inequalities are defined in terms of social welfare functions or distributional properties (Nolan 2000, p. 40). The emergence of the global economy in the twentieth century has brought a decrease in wage, thus causing household income inequalities and an exploitative market. The growth of high incomes in some sectors and the stagnation of the incomes in the labor markets have increased the gap in income distribution. The distributional measures of economic inequality, that is, the Gini and Theil coefficients have always revealed increasing inequality among individuals in the industrial societies as revealed by Nolan (Nolan 2000, p. 40). When social inequality is viewed as vertical classification social, it is conceptualized as an oppositional phenomenon. Social inequality has to be defined with regard to the relative position, in a matrix of oppositions of social categories. These social categories determine the relation of dominance. These categories include race, class and gender. Vertical classifications emerge out antagonistic and contradicting interest in relation to the objective position in the division of labor in society. Dominance and subordination arise from the objective opposition of social categories. The dichotomous, binary, and the polar conception of inequality such as ruler-ruled, rich-poor, masculine-feminine, are clearly explained by oppositional framework (Sapru 2012, p. 16). Marx’s theory of class proposes that inequality and conflict are inevitable within a capitalistic system. All the profit is produced at the expense of labor since all value is produced by labor. The objective position of the Bourgeoisie and the Proletarians are antagonistic to one another. Bourgeoisie refers to individuals who own industries and control the process of production. On the other hand, Proletarian are the labor providers in the industries. Advanced capitalistic systems sustain the exploitation of labor through work degradation and rational definition of jobs systems. It is also from the capitalistic systems that current inequalities in social classes have their origin (Sapru 2012, p. 16). Modern states use the idea of dominance in the analysis of equalities. The inequalities in the modern state are persistent. This is because individuals participate in the propagation of such dichotomies as male-female, white black, slave-owner (O’rand, 2012). The Concept of Power Max Weber states that power is the ability to control the behavior of others in spite of facing opposition. Power has its origin from coercion. Most of the modern governments utilize force or threats to deal with the revolting individuals in society. This can be seen clearly from Saddam government in Iraq. Many of the individuals feared him because he used torture, mass murder, secret police and chemical weapons to make the citizens not to revolt against him. Weber highlighted that states, which base their power on coercion, are likely to be unstable. The ruled in most cases for militia groups that fight back using violence. Power has other sources such as mobilization, monetary rewards, prestige, land, knowledge, organization and charisma. When power is legitimized, it translates to authority. Weber noted there is a need to establish a form of authority so as to avoid conflict and make society stable (Sills, 2012). Authority exists in three forms; this includes traditional, charismatic and rational-legal authority. Traditional authority originates from long held traditions from the past. Authority is passed from one generation to another. It is found in pre-industrial society such as monarch. Charismatic authority is based on individual appeal. Charismatic leaders are great orators and influence the masses greatly. The rational or legal authority has its foundation on rules and regulations. It is a feature of the modern states (Sills, 2012). The exercise of power manifests itself in different manners. This ranges from the social institutions to nations dominating other nations and threatening others at times. Power is reflected in social institutions by means of inequalities. The exercise of power requires persuasion or coercion (Andersen and Howard 2008, p. 513). Mills poses the question-who has more power in society? According to him, the high ranking members of the army, top ranking government officials and leaders of corporate organization are the one who rule the society (Mills 1970, p. 6) Mills (2000, p. 40) concludes that power has to do with the decisions made by humans. This is in regard to the way individuals organize their life and the events that make up history of the period they are living in. The means of power that exist today serve to manage and manipulate the consent of individuals. The knowledge of such powers is unknown. The powers are also employed without the sanction of reason or the conscience of the citizen. Coercion is not viewed as the end means of any form of power or authority. When coercion is analyzed, authority (power justified by individuals) and manipulation (power exercised to individuals unknowingly) has to be considered. In modern times, power has been viewed not to be authoritative as was in the case of medieval times. The rulers in the modern world see no justification to use force and power like in the ancient times. The present individuals are not reactive or radical as was medieval times. The modern leaders and the citizen see intellectual convictions and moral belief as unnecessary for the structure of power to persist and even flourish among the rulers and the ruled. References List Andersen, M. L. and Howard, F. T. (2008). Sociology: Understanding a Diverse Society, Belmont, CA, Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. p. 513. Chaurasia, R. S. (2001). History of Western Political Thought, New Delhi, Atlantic Publishers and Distributors. p. 308. Fromm, E. (2001). The Fear of Freedom, London, Routledge. p. 18-29 Mills, C. W. (2000). The Sociological Imagination, Oxford, Oxford University Press. p. 40. Mills, C.W. (1970). The Power Elite, London, Oxford University Press. p. 6 Nolan, B. (2000).The Distribution of Income in Ireland, Dublin, Oak Tree Press in assoc. with Combat Poverty Agency. p. 40. O’rand, A. M. (2012). Social Inequality. [Online] Available at http://edu.learnsoc.org/Chapters/social%20problems/13%20social%20inequality [Accessed 9 December 2012]. Sapru, R. K. (2012). Development Administration, New York, Sterling Publishers Pvt. Ltd. p. 16. Sills, S. J. (2012). Sociology 101: Introduction to Sociology. [Online] Available at http://uncgsoc101.wordpress.com/module-4- groups-and-organization/part-6/ [Accessed 9 December 2012] Read More