Essay Winstons Predicament in 1984 - 1422 Words

Winstons Predicament in 1984 The dystopian world George Orwell created for 1984 is a bleak, emotionless place, grey shaded and foul smelling, full of hate and distrust. The humans that inhabit it do not live, they are simply expected to exist for the good of the sinister Party, a totalitarian government, while their leader gazes down at them from every wall, watching their every move. One of these humans, and our protagonist, is Winston Smith. His problems when simplified may seem like the problems of any other person: his lack of freedom, his repressed emotions and his desperate loneliness. These problems however, are exasperated by the society he lives in. Thought crime, punishable by death, goes so far as to prohibit†¦show more content†¦Problems in communication between Winston and the opposite sex are hi-lighted when he speaks about his original companion and now estranged wife, Katharine in chapter 6 of the first part. The problems that exist between men and women in this society are many it seems, but they all stem back to emotional repression and the indoctrination the party carries out on its subjects. When we are told about pornosec, the literature department Julia works in, we are told that all the workers are female, mainly because the Party believe that men are too uncontrollable despite the partys repressive tactics. Not all contact with women is forbidden though, if Party members are willing to risk being caught in the proletarian area. As Winston tells us, the Party dont mind mere debauchery, as long as it is furtive and joyless, secret and with a lower class prole. The Partys sustained agenda to dirty and distort the natural instincts of the party members towards each other understandably hinders Winstons relationships with the opposite sex. With all this in mind, Winston moves to the conclusion that desire was thoughtcrime. The earlier reflection that thoughtcrime is death means that we can summarise that, to the people of Air Strip One, desire is death. All of which brings us to Winston desires and the creature with whom he simultaneously has the relationship that makes his miserable, isolated life worthwhile and the opelessShow MoreRelatedEssay on The Protagonists in the Novel 1984 and Film V for Vendetta913 Words   |  4 PagesIn the novel 1984 and the film â€Å"V for Vendetta†, the protagonist for both stories are captured while performing various acts of rebellion against the totalitarian government, of which is controlling their city. In punishment, the government tortures them with harsh, inhumane methods that are similar to t hose used in dictatorships during the 1900s like the USSR under Stalin’s rule. However, both protagonists are tortured by different sides, and by people from completely opposite ends of the politicalRead MoreGeorge Orwell s Caged Birds Accept Each Other But Flight Is What They Long For ``1717 Words   |  7 PagesTennessee Williams said, â€Å"Caged birds accept each other but flight is what they long for.† In George Orwell’s book 1984 the main character Winston Smith felt like a caged bird and wanted to be free of the totalitarian regime that was Big Brother. In the book, Orwell portrays a society in which life as we know it is none existent. People are stripped of their individualism, programmed like zombies and made to suppress each other. In the book, kids are used to and it would seem with really good effectRead MoreGeorge Orwell s The Darkness And Futility Of The Dystopian World1757 Words   |  8 Pagesprotagonist of our story Winston Smith lives. Alt hough the title of the novel is 1984 the work itself was written in the late 1940’s. The reasoning behind the title is Orwell’s prediction of what the year 1984 would look like if something were not changed. In the novel the author uses an abundance of symbolism and theme, which acts as a driving force of the novel. I have always been a fan of Orwell’s work and 1984 is definitely not an exception. We are almost immediately hit with a cascadingRead MoreWinston Smith of George Orwell’s 1984 and Hamlet of Shakespeare’s Hamlet1560 Words   |  7 Pagesapart from the masses in morals and attempt to accomplish a higher calling for the common good. The problem with this type of hero is that they are destined for suffering.Two such characters exist in classic literature, Winston Smith of George Orwell’s 1984 and Hamlet of William Shakespeare’s â€Å"Hamlet, Prince of Denmark.† Hamlet is the true classic tragic hero, though, because he is of noble birth, possesses high moral standards, completes the task he is given to better the world, and causes tragedy inRead MoreEssay on George Orwell and Winston Smith in Nineteen Eighty-Four2347 Words   |  10 Pagesthe general public. According to Woodcock, Orwell definitely based the Ministry of Truth and Winstons work on his experiences at the BBC (9). Winstons role in Big Brothers government was a p rojected charicteristic of Orwells political opinions. Furter exemplifying the attribution of Orwells characteristics through Winston Smith, is the manifestation of Orwells political views in Winstons own writings. Although Orwell wrote publicly, and Winston wrote in a private diary, they bothRead MoreAnalysis Of Yevgeny Zamyatin s The Road For Future Dystopian Novels 1935 Words   |  8 Pages Yevgeny Zamyatin’s We is known as the first dystopian novel and has paved the road for future dystopian novels, like George Orwell’s 1984. Both We and 1984 are scarily relevant to the 21st century and act as warnings against the natural outcomes of totalitarianism. We’s protagonist is numbered D-503, a mathematician and the engineer behind the Integral. He lives under the careful watch of the Guardians and stays loyal to the authoritarian rule of the Benefactor. He lives in a city-state called the

The Basics Of Personality Theory - 2545 Words

Abstract A theory can be defined as a set of ideas that helps us to understand, explain, predict, and control situations. A person’s personality is often known as what makes them who they are. The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a persons’ personality as, â€Å"the set of emotional qualities, ways of behaving, etc., that makes a person different from other people.† Now, putting those two concepts together, this paper will discuss personality theory. There are six major ideas that make up the basics of personality theory. The six major ideas that make up the basics of personality theory are, nature versus nurture, the unconscious, view of self, development, motivation, and maturation. These six ideas can also be categorized into two†¦show more content†¦A biblical foundation can solve the ongoing issue. But how can that be uniform across the field of psychology when psychology is mostly science based and not based on biblical principles? This paper will answe r these questions and give a clear incite on personality theory. Foundations of Personality Nature vs Nurture Nature versus nurture is a complex issue that has been studied for many years (Gibson, 2013). Some suggest that nature is the basis of personality, while others hold that nurture, which is the environment around a person, is the basis of personality (Gibson Smith, 2014). Nature is that of which is inherited. A person has no control over nature. Nature is everything that is genetically inherited by an individual. Nurture refers to all other influences in a person’s life from the time they are born. Nurture can also refer to experiences that a person receives during the course of their life. This complex issue can be best explained as arguments whether certain aspects of a persons’ personality is inherited or learned. Some would say that this argument should be settled by saying both sides are correct. Some aspects of a persons’ personality is inherited and others can be learned. While that it true, the majority of a persons’ personality i s shaped by the environments and other people that a person surrounds themselves in. The arguments surrounding this idea of nature verses nurture are strong. It is a proven fact that certain physical characteristics of

People Obey Authority and Commit Actions Against Conscience

Question: Discuss about thePeople Obey Authority and Commit Actionsfor Against Conscience. Answer: Introduction In a communal living it is requirement that we have some form of authority that can give a structure to our social life. Authority gives birth to obedience which is a basic structure in the social life of living beings. Only a man who would live in isolation would be free from obeying and submitting to others commands. In the long history of mankind there are several examples where hideous crimes were committed in the name of the obedience. Some examples are reliably established, when in the years 1933-1945 millions were slaughtered under the command of a leader. The policies that gave rise to this inhumane behavior was the seed of one twisted mind but was followed and carried out in the form of orders by many (Colman, 2009).So obedience dragged these numerous people to carry out orders that may or may not be against their beliefs and conscience? The most famous study that was conducted in the field of psychology was conducted by Stanley Milgram who explained that obedience can be li nked to political purposes; it can be productive as well as destructive. Obedience is the manifestation that ensures that an individual carries out the instructions that are issued by people in authority. It is cement that binds the individual to the system of authority. The question arises how so many people could engage in such unconscionable behaviors? How could they be blinded in doing and engaging in clear injustice? Well the answer is, a new creature is formed in an organisational structure that has no barriers of personal ethics, he or she is free from any inhibitions and is only concerned with the authority sanctions. People will obey orders if they recognize that the authority is legally based or morally right. Body Stanley Milgram was a psychologist from the Yale University. He wanted to know whether the Germans were extraordinarily obedient to their authority figures as an explanation to the killings in the World War II. Were there any justifications for the genocide of the World War II? In his study 40 males were selected between the ages of 20-50 (Milgram, 1963). These participants had various occupations such as high school teachers, laborers, salesman, engineer and postal clerks. They also ranged in educational level as some had not even finished elementary school whereas some had a doctorate ( Nicholson, 2011). They were told in the start of the experiment that they would be paid $4.50 for turning up to the lab and this payment does not depend on the result of the experiment. Procedure of the study was that every participant was teamed up with another participant as a teacher and learner. They had already drawn from their research on the participants that who is more suitable to be a teacher and who is nave enough to be the learner. But still they pretended to take out slips of paper to decide who will be who. The slips were rigged predicting the same outcome as the researchers were aiming for (Griggs, Whitehead, 2015). After the slips were drawn the learner participant was taken to a different adjacent room and was strapped to a electric chair. Now the learner and teacher were paired in a learning task where the learner has to remember the word pairs. If he answers an incorrect answer, he will be subjected to an electric shock by the teacher. Moreover the key command was that the teacher has to move one higher level in shock generator each time the learner flashes the wrong answer. The teachers were also asked to announce the voltage before administerin g the shock. This was done to ensure that the teacher knows that he is increasing the intensity of the voltage. But actually each time only 45 volts of shock was being delivered to the learner. (Freckelton, 2012). Through his Obedience Study Milgram wanted to know how far human beings can obey orders from someone if it resulted in hurting another human being. If the teacher does refuse to administer the shock they were given prods/orders to continue it (Persaud, 2005).. These prods or orders were not any punishments or forceful terms that were being dictated but they were sentences like Please continue, the experiment requires you to continue, it is absolutely essential that you continue, and you have no other choice but to continue. This proves that they were under no kind of pressure (Slater, et al., 2006). Many teachers were asked whether they think that the shocks they are delivering are painful. Almost all replied they know that the shocks are painful. All most all teachers subjected their learners to 300 Volts shocks. 5 out of 40 refused to deliver shocks beyond 300 volts. 26 participants delivered shocks till the end and were visibly stressed while administering the shocks. Through this experiment two findings were very clear; the first was the strength of the obedient tendencies that has manifested in this situation. The participants were clear that it is a moral breach to hurt another person yet 26 of them listened to a person who had no special authority to command them. They were to suffer no material loss if they disobeyed this person or no punishment would be given to them if they discontinued this experiment. Secondly the stress and agitation that these teachers experienced while delivering the shocks showed that this act of violence was against their values but still they were continuing with it. (Haslam, Reicher,2006). Milgrams experiment proves that even when none of the participants were under any violent or physical restraints they continued to go along, as people tend to follow orders as obedience to authority is ingrained in all of us. It is how we are brought up. We learn it in institutions such as school, family and work. Through this experiment the extreme willingness of adults to obey commands of authority was seen and demanded further explanation (Burger, 2009).. His study was also carried out in different replications in Spain and Netherlands. In Netherlands and Spain the results showed 90% compliance by the participants. This shows that obedient participants were in majority in other countries as well. Another study that demonstrated the power of roles was the Prison study conducted in Stanford Prison by Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues. They wanted to know if university students were assigned in the roles of guards and prisoners, what would happen (Bocchiaro, Zimbardo, 2010). Men who participated in the study were being paid daily fees and agreed to a part of the experiment for two weeks. They were randomly assigned in the roles of prisoners and guards. It was noticed that the participants that were assigned the roles of prisoners became panicky, distressed and helpless in a short time. Some started becoming rebellious and started showing emotional distress. After a few days the prisoners were begging to get out even forfeiting their monitory gains but on the other hands the participants that were assigned as guards were adjusting well to their new power (Carnahan, McFarland, 2007). They were free to use any method to maintain peace and order but they automatically choose to b e abusive and harsh even when the prisoners were not resisting. The guards that were less cruel never complained about the behavior of their abusive peers. It was clear, that the situation rather than their individual personality was causing the persons behavior. The experiment lasted for six days as the students that were assigned as Prisoners were heading towards a terrifying transformation that the researchers never wanted. Critics of the study maintain that the study is flawed as students knew how to behave as guards and prisoners as they have all watched numerous movies about it. But Craig Haney and Philip Zimbardo explained that if they the guards were just having fun and acting why would they behave as it is their real job. In the year 1998 Zimbardo studied real prisoners and guards and was able to support his study findings. (Griggs, 2014). Both experiments Obedience study and the Prison experiment support the result that the participants behavior was changed by the authority and environment around them. These studies also prove how social roles influence our behavior. Even when the guards that were less harsh on the prisoners, decided to look the other way as they thought under the circumstances they have to support their peers. Allocating responsibility to the authority is a common way in which people try to justify their uncommon behavior. These people hand the responsibility of their actions to the authority therefore trying to absolve them of accountability. It was observed in the Milgram Obedience Study that many participants who were assigned teachers role showed an attitude that the learner is getting shocks because he has committed a mistake and the Teacher is just following orders. In contrast the ones that refused to give high voltage shocks took responsibility for their actions thus refused to grant legitimacy to the authority (Edenfield, 2003). After the experiment a participant explained how shoving the responsibility of his actions was the most cowardly thing to do. Symbols such as scientist in the white coat, chain on prisoners and sunglasses on guards played a crucial role. In the Prison experiment by Zimbardo the guards were provided by sunglasses to prevent any eye contact this reduced the human factor between the participants. Prisoners were made to wear a bolted chain around the ankle to feel humiliated, and emasculated. In the Milgram Obedience study the lab coat scientist or experimenter was a figure of authority even when he had no real authority on the participants as they had volunteered to be in the study. The famous Kitty Genovese murder in New York in 1964 is an example of bystander effect as when Genovese was stabbed outside her apartment, many observed but none stepped to help or call the police. This perceived diffusion in responsibility can be caused by factors such as the presence of many people. The term bystander effect is the phenomenon when the presence of a number of people discourages a person to help another in distress. The chance of others helping individuals in need is inversely related to number of bystanders. So if more people are involved than it is less likely that one of the bystanders will help. (Hudson, Bruckman, 2004), (Fischer, et al., 2006). Conclusion The study conducted by Milgram shows that every person has a conscience which controls their destructive drives. But when they are integrated in an organisational structure the individual changes in a new creature that is released from any inhibition and he is only concerned with the authority sanctions. The result of the experiment shows that people usually do what they are being asked by someone else. When authority was pitted against the participants moral imperatives of hurting others, authority won many times.( Haslam, Reicher, 2007). The fundamental breach of moral belief of not hurting the other person is over ridden by authority. The sheer strength of obedient tendencies is manifested in this situation. Where some participants expressed deep disapproval of the electrical shocks and some branded the experiment as stupid and unnecessary. Yet all complied with the commands. The Stanford Prison Experiment is a central contribution to the Milgrams paradigm of quantifying aggressi on where good people can be induced into doing evil deeds. The human nature, in some powerful social settings can be transformed in character, and studies like these leave the people disturbed, mystified and surprised. People will obey orders if they recognize that the authority is legally based or morally right. Against the victim blaming and despairing perspective the hard lessons that we can learn from Stanford prison experiment and Milgram studies are that, good and normal people can be made into doing something evil. References Burger, J. M. (2009). Replicating Milgram: Would people still obey today?American Psychologist,64(1), 111. Bocchiaro, P., Zimbardo, P. G. (2010). Defying unjust authority: An exploratory study.Current Psychology,29(2), 155170. Carnahan, T., McFarland, S. (2007). Revisiting the Stanford Prison experiment: Could participant self-selection have led to the cruelty?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,33(5), 603614 Colman, Andrew (2009).A Dictionary of Psychology. Oxford New York: Oxford University Press. Edenfield, K. A. (2003). Irrational exuberance Robert J. Shiller, Princeton university press, Princeton, NJ Freckelton, I. (2012). Behind the shock machine: The untold story of the notorious Milgram psychology experiments, by Gina Perry.Psychiatry, Psychology and Law,19(3), 448450. Fischer, P., Greitemeyer, T., Pollozek, F., Frey, D. (2006). The unresponsive bystander: Are bystanders more responsive in dangerous emergencies?European Journal of Social Psychology,36(2), 267278. Griggs, R. A. (2014). Coverage of the Stanford Prison experiment in introductory psychology textbooks.Teaching of Psychology,41(3), 195203 Griggs, R. A., Whitehead, G. I. (2015). Coverage of Milgrams obedience experiments in social psychology textbooks: Where have all the criticisms gone?Teaching of Psychology,42(4), 315322. Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience.The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,67(4), 371378. Nicholson, I. (2011). Shocking masculinity: Stanley Milgram, Obedience to authority, and the Crisis of Manhood in cold war America.Isis,102(2), 238268. Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. (2007). Beyond the Banality of evil: Three dynamics of an Interactionist social psychology of tyranny.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,33(5), 615622. Haslam, S. A., Reicher, S. (2006). Stressing the group: Social identity and the unfolding dynamics of responses to stress.Journal of Applied Psychology,91(5), 10371052. Hudson, J. M., Bruckman, A. S. (2004). The bystander effect: A lens for understanding patterns of participation.Journal of the Learning Sciences,13(2), 165195. Persaud, R. (2005). The man who shocked the world: The life and legacy of Stanley Milgram.BMJ,331(7512), 356356. Slater, M., Antley, A., Davison, A., Swapp, D., Guger, C., Barker, C., Sanchez-Vives, M. V. (2006). A virtual Reprise of the Stanley Milgram obedience experiments.PLoS ONE,1(1), e39.

James William Gibsons Novel, Warrior Dreams Analysis Essay Example

James William Gibsons Novel, Warrior Dreams: Analysis Paper For most men, their definition of masculinity includes strength, adventure and the will to compete in violent struggles. This theory Is reinforced In popular movies, television shows, music, and books that glorify this behavior and have dangerous consequences for our country and even around the world. The seriously threatening and real-world Implications that can be found In the political and popular culture varies from all kinds of different movies, television shows, and even video games. Movies that have real world gun fights and bloody cringing scenes like the Saw series movies, and war movies like Saving Private Ryan, Full Metal Jacket, Gladiator and the Rumba series has contributed to the promotion and acceptance of violence in our society. These movies all portrayed a strong leader and warrior hero that was dominant and is what may have led to most warrior fantasies for males that watch these films and cannot control their actions. Especially movies that were about the Vietnam War, showing how different things were during and after the war. For example, when the United States had to deal with an extremely dilapidating loss In the Vietnam War, It was almost as If no one knew what to do. The people In America were nearly dazed and confused on how to take action and how they truly felt after the shameful defeat In Vietnam. I also agree with Gibbons sociological theories and interpretation of response of American subculture after the disillusionment and disgrace that was felt by Americans when the united states lost. American were used to winning all wars and always had been. We will write a custom essay sample on James William Gibsons Novel, Warrior Dreams: Analysis specifically for you for only $16.38 $13.9/page Order now We will write a custom essay sample on James William Gibsons Novel, Warrior Dreams: Analysis specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer We will write a custom essay sample on James William Gibsons Novel, Warrior Dreams: Analysis specifically for you FOR ONLY $16.38 $13.9/page Hire Writer This first defeat in a war changed almost everything in regards to males attitudes and egos. Men felt that they had to get back their masculinity to prove they were winners not losers. As mentioned in Warrior Dreams in Signs of Life, The bitter controversies surrounding the Vietnam War had discredited the old American ideal of the gasoline warrior hero for much of the public. (Gibson 627) Meaning that most of the people In America were severely affected by this war, even the sales of ammunitions In stores and weapons Increased after the war. In the media today, Television shows have plenty to offer young males to take this warrior fantasy the wrong way on violence and in dangerous situations. I believe that many of the warrior Tentacles Godson NAS explain auto are strongly placket up tongue television shows for example the series 24, Prison Break, and Hobos The Sopranos all promote violence and crime. Many young adult males seem to duplicate these violent actions and then anticipate acceptance of this behavior towards other people in the real world. These implications include, gang fights, school violence, murders and massacres like the Columbine High School incident, Virginia Techs dramatic day, and the Cleveland High School shootings. One example of how real-world implications can be caused by warrior fantasies is the Columbine High School massacre. The Columbine High School massacre occurred on Tuesday, April 20, 1999, at Columbine High School in Jefferson County, Colorado. Two senior students, Eric Harris and Dylan Keyhole, began a massacre killing of 12 students and one teacher. They also had injured 21 other students, including three people that were attempting to escape. Eric Harris and Dylan Keyhole then committed suicide. It is the fourth-deadliest school massacre in United States history, after the 1927 Bath School disaster, 2007 Virginia Tech massacre and the 1966 University of Texas massacre, and the deadliest for an American high school. The Virginia Tech massacre is another example how real-world warrior fantasies can eve implications affecting people in a very negative way. The Virginia Tech massacre was a school shooting that took place April 16, 2007 on the campus of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blackburn, Virginia. In two separate attacks, approximately two hours apart, Swung-Huh Choc, killed 32 people and wounded many others before committing suicide. The massacre is the deadliest peacetime shooting incident by a single gunman in United States history, on or off a school campus. Campus police in the United States and Canada are often sworn Alice officers employed by a public school district, college or university to protect the campus and surrounding areas and the people who live on, work on and visit it. No one thinks anything of it anymore, but it didnt use to be like that. On-campus police officers at schools all around the country is an accepted occurrence now. Many campus police forces employ a combination of police officers, security guards and student workers. Responsibilities of student employees can range from limited administrative activities to law enforcement functions comparable to those held by emission officers. I believe that in the past our society that didnt need as much security, however, schools today we require and expect a higher degree of safety at all times. Warrior Dreams explains how the gun culture relates to the history of violence that America has encountered over the years since the loss of Vietnam. It also challenges the common belief that we lost in Vietnam because we didnt fully commit to it, which Gibson proposes is a suitable lie to Justify modern militarism. After reading Gibbons essay a few times, I think that the book paints an overly negative picture. My views on this writing are supportive and I have had the same conclusions as he has had through out the writing. I believe that supporting Gibbons suggestions is something that most people would agree with because of the violent facts that have occurred in violent incidents all around the country and world wide for years now. If these theories were examined and discussed in high schools by students across the country, the Implications would De lessoned. I en negative response could De replace DYE positive action and helpful dialogue with a required course titled, Life without Violence.