Philosophies of an Ideal Society - Essay Example

Philosophies of an Ideal Society Introduction: Human beings have a nature which forces them to explore new ideas, concepts, ways and thoughts. They develop their own ideals of personalities, living standards, society and advancements. These ideals change as the world progresses and these ideals help them in developing and changing the olden patterns of life. They strive and struggle to achieve what their idealism suggests them to do. Their continuous individualistic and collaborative efforts sometimes lead to greater changes which affect them positively while other times their effort continues for longer periods with less changes being occurred. The key is to change the society and the concept which are prevalent. The ideals being set or formulated in one’s mind are not based on unstable thoughts and feelings but instead these ideals come from deep and long lasting thoughtfulness of a person and the agreement of these thoughts by different people provides an ideal image for the society. The concept of an ideal society has different meanings for different people. The philosophers have long been struggling to provide supporting evidences and reasons for their idealistic society to flourish and be admired. The approach of an ideal society, however, is not the same for everyone some people believe in a completely democratic society as an ideal society while others believe in capitalism and communism (Beehler & Drengson 1978 pp. 213-216). This paper analyzes the differing views of an ideal society from the perspectives of the great philosophers like Freud, Marx and others. Using the ideal society concepts of the great philosophers, the paper establishes the concept of an ideal society which I believe in and strive or wish to dwell in. Marx’s and Freud’s Idea: Karl Marx, like Freud saw conflict within society, but had radically different ideas and perceptions about humanity and civilization. Marx saw some of the same problems Freud saw, but chalked it up to inter-economic class conflict instead of conflict within one’s psyche. Marx believed that this class conflict was caused by one class, the bourgeois (the upper elite of society), which he characterized as having the great majority of wealth and rule over the lower class of society. The lower class, or the proletariat’s, worked for the bourgeois and depended on the elite members of society whether they wanted to or not. This view of economic class strife was just one stage of Marx’s idea that all history was leading up to some finality and that eventually all of man would be able to live in a utopia. Marx also applied this idea in reverse and attempted to explain that the proletariat class and bourgeois class have existed in varying forms for all of mankind’s history. He tried to illustrate using the example of slavery and feudalism that each time a form of oppression by a class of another class was destroyed a new form took it’s place. Marx felt that it was a communist responsibility to awaken the ignorant Freud and Marx can be seen as two gems of the philosophical world. Their theories and ideas are highly regarded by people (Rawls & Freeman 2007 pp. 359-370). The concept of an ideal society, if derived from their views, provides two largely different concepts. Karl Marx was a German revolutionist, whereas, Sigmund Freud was a psychologist. Their expertise, careers, educational backgrounds and ideas were all different form each other. Marx viewed capitalism as the major cause of the society’s downfall (Munck 2002 pp. 40-46). On the other hand, Freud believed that the society is facing troubles and downfalls due to the individualistic tension in people’s own psyche. Freud provided a cynical view on the human nature and the concept of his ideal society greatly depended on the individualistic efforts to improve people’s own conditions. Being a psychologist, Freud often discussed societies and individuals and their behaviors and changing patterns in terms of the instincts which work behind them. According to Freud, men are struggling to repress the anti-social instinct which is the reason of the social evils existed (Homiletic review, 1894). Marx also observed instincts working behind the tensions in the society but he failed to analyze the conflicting relationship between social tension and individuals’ ego. Marx was more of an opinion that human beings’ greed and oppression is the major cause of the wrongs and evils in the society. Being a psychoanalyst, Freud’s theories and concepts were more inclined towards analyzing and orientation of conflicts. He believed that men are glorified animals and seen intellect as the line of distinction between men and animals. He divided men’s psyche into three major parts: the id, the ego and the superego. The superego is the men’s conscience, the values, concepts and impositions that have been internalized since the childhood. The superego is the most powerful player in the story of men’s self. It controls a men’s authority to control, judge and regulate. Superego has the power to punish men by indulging them in guilt. Guilt, according to Freud, is the call of conscience to notice and react to the failure of one’s ideals or conceptualizations. The ego is representation of a person’s self, his desires, decisions capacity as an individual and his understanding and logics. Lastly, Id is the representation of a person’s surge for more desires and dissatisfaction with the relationships, power, status, love, and primary needs (Andersen & Taylor 2008 pp. 92-97). The tension that exists between these 3 parts of a man’s instinct is the reason behind the evils prevailing in the world. In the essay “Civilization and It’s Discontents”, Freud asserts that “civilizations are developed through the channelling of anti-social erotic and aggressive urges into constructive outlets”. He argues that the people who are not able to accept the changes in the society form the basis of tension within the society. Freud believes that men are destined to struggle and seek pleasure and remove distress from life. In this struggle man is more likely to oppose others and to achieve his own ideals of life. If we analyze the life in the light of Freud’s concept, it is not difficult to judge that society is built up of complex relationships of civilizations. Civilizations are made up of the individuals who are alike in their thoughts and beliefs. Within these distinct civilizations there are individuals who have differing views, needs and viewpoints. However, these distinctions and needs of individuals’ ‘ego’ are suppressed by the limitations and rules set by the civilization. The society and social rules, in this regard, act as a super-ego which suppress the individualistic needs and views which contradict the civilization’s overall views. The individualistic super-ego, on the other hand, acts as a safeguard of individuals’ acts which are limited keeping the social laws and views under consideration. If a person’s ego tries to overcome the super-ego (social norms) the conflicts between that individual and others arise. Hence, we can say that society is the upper-ego which has set ideas, rules and limits on each aspect and when a person’s ego or id tries to override that super-ego at social level conflicts arise. An ideal society according to Freud’s concepts is the one where super-ego’s are correctly analyzed and followed. Super-ego provides us the distinction between rights and wrongs of our acts and a society where super-ego is correctly formulated from the beginning (i.e. childhood) is superior to the societies where conflicts exist. Karl Marx also pointed out the conflicts in the society but believed that class conflicts and capitalism were the key players in boosting up those conflicts. He believed that the conflicts were mainly due to the capitalization of wealth and power in one class of society (bourgeois) and the other class (proletariat) being working under their surveillance and dependent on the upper class of the society. The proletariats being dependent on the elite class of the society are compelled to work under their power whether or not they accept such authority over them. Marx’s ideal society is, then, the one where neither the bourgeois nor the proletariats are under someone’s pressure. This is only possible in a classless society. Marx’s ideal is a classless society which provides equality of wealth, power and resources to everyone. Marx believes that the end of capitalism lies in the patterns which the capitalist society possesses. Hence, the destruction of capitalism is the capitalism itself. The lust for power and wealth motivates the capitalist society counterpart to strive more and more and find new ways to double what they actually have. This lust and enthusiasm to compete would eventually result in over production, higher technological usage and more advanced techniques to produce higher quantities of goods. As a result, the proletariats will be freed from the harsher labor techniques involved. The use of machines and modern techniques will result in higher production and the prices of these goods would be lower than ever. Such a state would bring the facilities available to everyone and people will have equal chances to acquire the luxuries and meet the necessities of life. This end of capitalism would sow the seed of the new socialist society. Marx’s ideal society also requires the environment to be a communist one where the land or property is not owned by a single class or individuals but is owned by the state. The state being the sole owner would be able to provide equal chances of benefiting from the land by giving individuals an equal right to use that land. This equal opportunity to work on the state’s land provides an additional equality option to the society (Magstadt 2008, pp. 70-77. Plato’s Idea: In understanding the differing concepts of an ideal state, the ideas and concepts of Plato are also worth discussing here. Plato believes that the society is mainly divided into three broad categories including rulers, soldiers, and the people. Plato believed that an ideal society is the one where every person is assigned the work which suits his skills or qualities. A person having good command over people’s ideas and having convincing skills should be given the work of rulers. The powerful and brave must be given the roles of soldiers to perform and so on. This way the whole of the society will be satisfied with the roles being given to them. However, the ideas of Plato’s ideal society include that the people involved in each category should be the offspring of the people belonging to a specific category. For instance, the offspring of rulers should be given the authority of rulers and must be given similar position. This theory, however, again binds the power and certain positions to a group of people. This may bring unsatisfactory attitudes of certain people who are offspring of one category but wish to be a part of the other. Plato’s arguments are regarded to be a way to motivate people in getting satisfied by their specific roles. Again, the compulsion to accept their roles does not bring any justice to their instincts which require them to flourish and step ahead to achieve what they desire to become (Honderich 2005 pp. 228-232). Personal Understanding and Discussion The different philosophies about an ideal society provide different concepts about how a society should be and how people should behave in it. The Freud’s theory is an important yet complex concept which involves psychoanalysis of people’s instincts and behaviors. Freud believes that society acts as a super ego which must and often does prevail over a man’s ego. However, the conflict between a person’s personal concepts with those rules or conceptions set by a particular civilization creates tension in the society. He believes that if individuals succeed to win power over their super ego they would be able to fight with the anti-social behaviors and aggression that leads to the distortion of the social peace. This theory is based on facts and may be helpful for people to reach an ideal state of society but the theory is more inclined towards psychological concepts which are not well understood by most of the people. Moreover, the psychoanalysis of an ideal society does not provide a perfect way to be followed by the individuals. Marx’s idea about an ideal society, on the other hand, provides a relatively true concept as the possession of wealth and power in a few hands would result in the feelings of hatred and chaos in the minds of others. The antisocial behaviors would arise as a result of such unequal distribution of wealth, power and social distribution. The classless society is undoubtedly an ideal concept to of a society. However, the efforts of some people and skills of the others may not be equal. Hence, there would be discrimination in an attempt to pursue justice and equality. In an ideal society every person should be rewarded and provided opportunities according to their skills and abilities. Plato’s concept of positioning people in the three categories without weighing their skills or willingness is prejudiced in itself. The rewards which may be offered in order to make their positions attractive and fruitful to them may motivate them to work in their relevant position but may not assure their best efforts in their careers. Hence, the society may not be an ideal one since the individuals are less than independent in their positions. Conclusion In conclusion, we can say that each theory presented by the philosophers about an ideal society is not completely impractical or unreasonable but there is some flaw or incompleteness in their ideas. The concepts and philosophies discussed above require some changes in them or are not practically acceptable by the society. In my opinion, an ideal society is the one in which equality and independence is the most important concept and the most regarded one in the society. An ideal society should possess attributes of the different philosophies but must not be an inflexible approach to be followed. There is a need to change the ideal society’s philosophy as soon as a need to change is felt. The philosophies require changing with the changes in the effects of those philosophies and the ideas and behaviors of the society. An ideal society must give enough independence to individuals which give them the autonomy to select careers and life patterns as they wish. It must give the individuals with equal opportunities but must not restrict them from developing and doubling their wealth as long as it is achieved by legal and socially acceptable manner. The discrimination on the basis of gender and other grounds should be avoided. An ideal society should give equal opportunities to all individuals to become a leader, a guard or any other professional without any consideration given to the positions of their forefathers. The ideal society can be achieved only if the individuals, state, governments and laws promote equality and peace. The violation of rules and regulations should end up creating the same circumstances for individuals belonging to different social, economic, ethnic or cultural background. An ideal society may not be easy to achieve, however, the current condition of the society may be improved by eliminating corruption, illegal acts, discrimination, bias and hindrance of class barriers. Bibliography: Bottom of Form Rawls, J., & Freeman, S. R. (2007). Lectures on the history of political philosophy. Cambridge, Mass: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Beehler, R., & Drengson, A. R. (1978). The Philosophy of society. London: Methuen. Munck, R. (2002). Marx 2000: Late marxist perspectives. London: Zed Books. Homiletic review. (1894). Philadelphia: American Ecclesiastical Review Co. Andersen, M. L., & Taylor, H. F. (2008). Sociology: Understanding a diverse society. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth. Magstadt, T. M. (2008). Understanding politics: Ideas, institutions & issues. Princeton, N.J: Recording for the Blind & Dyslexic. Honderich, T. (2005). The Oxford companion to philosophy. Oxford: Oxford university press. Read More