Nineteen Eighty Four - Dystopian Society Essay Example for Free

Nineteen Eighty Four Dystopian Society Essay In the novel â€Å"Nineteen Eighty-Four† George Orwell created the dystopian society of Oceania, where the government has complete control of the language used by citizens. Aside from individuals of lower social class called the â€Å"Proles,† the â€Å"Party† constantly watches everyone. In an attempt to eliminate any chances of rebellion against the Party, they created the new language of â€Å"Newspeak. † Newspeak eliminates any controversial words along with all synonyms, antonyms and verbs. By doing this, the government has gained the power of meaning. Syme, a specialist in Newspeak tells the main character Winston exactly what control Newspeak has allowed the Party to have. â€Å"Don’t you see the whole aim of Newspeak is the narrow the range of thought? In the end we shall all make thoughtcrime literally impossible, because there will be no words in which to express it. † (Orwell 54). Along with that, the Party also has complete control of written language by altering history related documents to match the history that is in favor of this political power. The altering of these documents is what happens to be Winston’s job. While at work Winston pondered the power of being able to control the past, coming to a startling realization. As written by the narrator of the novel, â€Å"the past, he reflected had not only been altered, it had actually been destroyed. For how could you establish even the most obvious fact when there existed no record outside your own memory? † (Orwell 36). On top of being historically mislead, citizens are restricted of express any thought of their own or any way to voice against the Party. When you no truthful record for the past, the past doesn’t exist. When you have no words to associate with a meaning, the meaning behind the word then vanishes just like the political history of Oceania. For these reasons, a society with government restricted verbal and written language is one that proves to be dystopian.

Last Chapter of A Brave New World :: A Brave New World

Last Chapter of A Brave New World John's eyes fluttered open and he cautiously surveyed his surroundings. Where was he taken? Who knocked him unconscious and carried him from his solitude at the lighthouse? He did not have to wait long for his answer, when he saw his friend standing over him, shaking him to awareness. "It's about time you came to," said Bernard Marx, "we've been worrying about you." Helmholtz laughed as he came around to the bed John was laying on. "Don't look at us like that, Savage. We have good news for you." Bernard wore a smug look on his face as he told John of their accomplishments. "We have met some of the most intelligent men of the world here at this island, and we found a way to overthrow this so called civilized society which has tried to subdue us one too many times. We destroyed all the soma in London, and right about now, all England is in an uproar. We were able to get you out in time; before anyone tried to come for you, youà ­re to blame for all this, you know." "Youà ­re a mighty unpopular fellow back in London at this moment, Savage," came Mustapha Mondà ­s voice from the corner. "But anyway, enough of this dallying, we have work to do." As John rose from the bed, all that he was hearing started to sink in. Loss of control in England? Thatà ­s not what he had intended. The damage was done, though, and Mustapha was right, they had a lot of work to do. There was no time to waste. The group consisted of one hundred fifty seven men and women who had been sent to the island because of their inability to follow the rules of civilized society, as well as Mustapha, Marx, Helmholtz, and John. Mustapha was the leader, of course, because he knew all the laws, and was a natural commander. Together, they planned to destroy the worldà ­s soma supplies, and all the manufacturing plants. Once the citizens were cut off from the drugs, theyà ­d be more apt to become deconditioned. The next step would be to teach the world of meditation and natural herbs such as St. Johnà ­s Wort for wellbeing, and to detoxify and preserve their bodies using deep tissue cleansing techniques and fasting. Schools had to be set up; treatment and rehabilitation centers had to be opened.

Would the World be a Better Place if Large-Scale Emigration to Other Planets were to be Possible?

Our world is in a predicament. The delicate balance that supports life that evolution (or God) has created is being tilted by deforestation, overfishing, increasing population, global warming and such, threatening the fundamentals for life. Planet Earth appears to be spiraling downwards towards an inescapable end. About half of the mature tropical forests, between 750 to 800 million hectares of the original 1. 5 to 1. 6 billion hectares that once covered the planet have been felled, and animals are becoming extinct more quickly than ever (experts have estimated that up to half of presently existing species may become extinct by 2100). Our main energy sources, oil and natural gas supplies, are rapidly running dry. The future of the earth, hilas, looks dark. Taking all of this into consideration, it appears that mass emigration to another planet might be the only solution. However, is it really too late to turn the clock? Or maybe more importantly, is it morally right to abandon ship when the storm is gathering? The damage we have caused to our world is both unbelievable and undeniable. Only 17% of planet Earth's landmass is still untouched by mankind (excluding Antarctica). Our world's natural oil and gas resources are soon fully consumed; renewable sources only stand for about 13% of the energy created. All the emissions from burning fossil fuels are carelessly released into the atmosphere, and as a result, the ozone layer is in an incredibly tattered shape. However, if we could move to another planet, thus leaving this one, the Earth would recuperate. The largest hole in the ozone, the one above the Antarctic, would, according to NASA scientists, recover by 2068. Similarly, if there were no humans to fish the oceans dry, and no humans to chop the forests down, slowly but steadily, the world's ecosystems would recover and the biodiversity would regain lost grounds. The human race has created this situation, and we owe it to the Earth and the other species that we reverse it. There are a number of valid arguments for saving our world by emigrating to another, and although leaving for another planet may save this one, abandoning Earth may not yet be necessary. All hope is not lost – it is still within our power to undo the damages ourselves. It will be a task of great difficulty, but one that we can pull off. Since when were problems solved by burying one's head in the sand? Besides, if you do bury your head in the sand, chances are, you won't like what you see when you stick it back up. Taking the emergency exit whenever there are bumps on the road will create a â€Å"laissez faire† mentality, which never has solved anything. If awareness of this crisis can be raised all around the world, and if people realize just how important the matter we are dealing with is, there is a significant chance that we can start acting in a sufficiently environmentally friendly manner for the previous natural balance to be restored, without us leaving Earth for a far-off planet. By abandoning the planet we do not solve the true problem, we simply run away from it. If we were all deported to another planet, but didn't change our behavior, all we would do is repeat the same mistakes we made on Earth. What does shifting planets mean if we still don't own up and take action to reverse the situation we have thrust ourselves into? If we recognize now that problems such as global warming, overfishing and deforestation are not resolved by turning our backs to them, it will also be understood that these will not vanish because we choose to flee from them. We must do something about the tribulations we have now, only then we can move on. Exporting our problems to another planet is not solving them. Furthermore, there is also is a moral aspect to this issue. It would be indecent and ethically incorrect to simply change planets and abandon earth when we are encountering real and serious problems which in addition are caused by ourselves This world is optimal for our form of life. If just the weight of the proton in the air molecule was the slightest bit different all life on earth would be impossible. Similarly, if aliens would visit Earth, they would die of inhaling oxygen. It is an incredible chain of circumstances that allow us to live by breathing oxygen. The human race has become adapted to live on planet Earth over millions and millions of years of evolution. Just like a hole is perfect for the water puddle it contains, Earth is perfect for man. This taken into consideration, we can't just destroy this Earth, and then leave it without the slightest effort to do something about it. We were made for this planet, and now that it is being destroyed, the very least we can do is to try to reverse what we've done. In any case, fleeing should be the very last option. All of us who inhabit Earth have inherited it from earlier generations. We are merely the present caretakers of this Earth, just like thousands of generations before us have been. Therefore, we have a moral responsibility, both towards our children as well as to our ancestors, to protect and preserve something extraordinary that no one ever can own, only borrow. On the one hand, it is a fact that we are well on the way of destroying Earth, and if all human beings were to leave the Earth, there is a chance that the Earth might recover. However, this is only true if all humans are transported to another planet. The question was â€Å"would the world be a better place if large-scale emigration to other planets were to be possible? † Upon a closer look, mass emigration does not necessarily mean that all humans are transported, rather just some. This is certainly of importance, as it is not necessarily the number of people on Earth that decides if the world is going to recuperate or not. What is more important is how the people who actually do live here treat the environment, i e how much carbon emissions are released into the atmosphere, how much fish we fish from our seas and how many trees we cut from our forests. If 50% of the world's population was evacuated to another planet, but the remaining 50% treated the environment worse than before, the problems would not be solved. Rather than focusing on efficient ways to deport masses of people to other planets, we should focus on efficient ways to save this planet, with us on it. On the other hand, it is probably true that the abandoning of the planet will have to occur sooner or later. 99. 9% of all species ever to reside on planet Earth are now extinct. Mankind will certainly not be an exception. Even if we don't drive ourselves into extinction, or a comet crashing into Earth doesn't do it for us, in about one billion years the sun will start dying. It will slowly begin to swell up, and produce more heat, making life on this entire solar system impossible. If the ultimate aim of mankind is survival, emigration to another planet might then be the only option. However, this is not the case today. We still have an option; so let us take advantage of it.

Socrates, Plato, and Aristotels View on Happiness

What Is Happiness What is happiness, and how can one achieve true happiness? This is the ultimate question of life and what every person is seeking an answer to. Many feel that they have found their answer in belonging to the faith of their choice, but what is it that their faith teaches them that brings them happiness? The Philosophers Socrates, Plato and Aristotle all have a similar view on what happiness is and how to achieve it. Aristotles view is based on Platos and Platos is based on Socrates teachings; this is why they are similar but they are all important and different with each philosophers personal views and beliefs. Socrates was a great man who was assassinated for his beliefs on the purpose of life and how to live†¦show more content†¦The first virtue is Temperance, where a person has the ability to control their own self. Self control and moderation lead to greater goods in life. Second virtue is Courage or the ability to will yourself to live and fully succeed as your part in s ociety. Wisdom is the third virtue which is held by the ruler. Wisdom is only found in communities that are ruled by kings that have seen the good or the Philosopher Kings. These three virtues lead to the fourth and final Cardinal Virtue, Justice. Justice is the excellence of function for the whole. When the community or society as a whole is functioning well and each individual is functioning in their place all of the individuals are happy. In the effect Plato believes that every person has their place and function in life and society and that if they perform their part well they will be happy. Also every individual has the choice to be happy. The choice to function well or inappropriately is the choice one must make to be happiest. Obviously inappropriate actions lead to unhappiness. In addition a well functioning society along with the well functioning individuals in it must follow the Four Cardinal Virtues. After all of these means have been met, then society and every person will experience true happiness. Naturalism is the belief that reality is the natural world. This belief and way of thinking was brought about by Aristotle; one of Platos pupils. In order to explain the four