Dystopian Social Contract

The Battle against Chaos and Challenging Inequities

The Battle against Chaos and Challenging Inequities Alan Sears and James Cairns in their book A Good Book, in Theory: Making Sense through Inquiry present the most influential theories of the social development and changes.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Battle against Chaos and Challenging Inequities specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More The battle against chaos as the main function of the societal regulation as it is outlined in the social order model and challenging inequities as the driving force for the social transformation as it is outlined in the conflict theory explain the main underlying processes of the societal development from different theoretical perspectives. According to the social order perspective, the main function of the society rules is preventing the treat of chaos and savagery in the community. The battle against chaos can be defined as the society control over its members intended to protect them from their inherently brutal selves through soc ializing them. It is assumed that were it not for the society regulations, every individual would act according to his/her narrow self-interests disregarding the interests of the others (Sears and Cairns 17). An interesting example of the community degradation due to the lack of social order can be found in the book Lord of Flies by Golding in which a group of children left on a desert island do not manage to preserve their civilization and finally go wild. Thus, the plot of this book illustrates the idea that the social order can be regarded as the product of the societal control which is significant for preventing the chaos and bloodshed characteristic of the primitive tribes lacking these regulations. Another assumption which can be driven from the central idea of the battle against the chaos as the primary function of the social order is that a strong set of common values is required for preserving the society order.Advertising Looking for essay on american literature? L et's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More As compared to the external policies, the self-control and the established habit of regulating oneself are more effective for preventing the degradation to the level of the self-serving brutality.  In that regard, the social stratification can threaten the appropriate societal order because the individuals who have less power will consider the order as unjust and would not share the common values. Then, the pluralism of the political processes and the negotiations between the competing interest groups when solving certain significant problems is significant for maintaining the social order. For this reason Sears and Cairns develop the idea that a long-term modernization and constant social changes are important for eliminating unjust social practices, preserving social order and ensuring the country’s progress and prosperity. In contrast to the social order perspective viewing the pres ervation of the social order as the necessary battle against the possible chaos, the conflict model emphasizes the role of modern society in creating the inequalities which are put into its basis. The challenging inequities are viewed as the struggle between the disadvantages groups and those who occupy the power positions which results in the conflict of interests and is followed by social changes (Sears and Cairns 20). The examples of labor unions intended to protect the rights of the employees and feminist movement struggling for the equal pay and rights of women can illustrate the conflict perspective upon the role of society control in the social processes and changes. The central assumption of the conflict model is that the modern society is based upon challenging inequalities which can be regarded as the driving forces of the social changes.Advertising We will write a custom essay sample on The Battle against Chaos and Challenging Inequities specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More In general, it can be concluded that the concept of the battle against the chaos was used by Sears and Cairns for explaining the role of societal regulations from the social order perspective, whereas the concept of challenging inequities was intended to illustrate the main driving force of the social change according to the conflict model of society development. Sears, Alan and James Cairns. A Good Book, in Theory: Making Sense through Inquiry. North York: University of Toronto Press Incorporated, 2010. Print.

Should Animals Have Their Own Rights Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2500 words

Should Animals Have Their Own Rights - Essay Example The author of the reprot talks about Alan Holland’s review of animal rights which depicts depth and richness, making it a helpful tool in solving disputes and practical problems. This report can be viewed as one side of a discourse with Holland, focusing on the main themes in this area of study. The report will start by characterizing speciesism, including a claim that many individuals are in support of rejecting it, irrespective of the fact that they never fail to sanction what is apparently the obvious effects of rejecting the issue. This paper will relate this failure to the historical views over the interrelations between humans, nature and other animals, which is still depicting wide disparities. This report holds that, while a thorough anti-speciesism values the maxim that ‘humans are an aspect of the natural world’, these dodges will not be present. The paper will reach a conclusion, through a discussion of the consistency of anti-speciesist’s resolu tion of the rewilding nature. The points explained through the paper include that under the issue of predation and eating meat, a guardian farmer of a domesticated animal holds the right to slaughter it for meat or trade it for money and the goodness of humans as compared to the cruelty of the wild, bestows extra rights on the human than the animal. Thirdly, when using the case of rewilding nature, man holds more rights to animals due to the services they offer to the natural world and animals (Signal and Taylor 147-157). Under speciesism and the view on the rights of animals, many people in today’s world will regard that animals hold rights. This is evident from popular parlance, informal polls and recent legislation. In jurisdictions like California, Colorado, Boulder and Berkeley, people are not viewed as the owners of pets, but instead, they are viewed as the guardians to their animal companions (AMVA). During the mid 1990s, the NORC (National Opinion Research Center) at the University of Chicago questioned a sample representing the American population, whether they were in agreement with this statement: â€Å"animals should hold the moral rights that humans have†. From the surveys, 35% of the respondent in one survey and 39% in the second were in agreement or strongly in agreement with the statement (Regan 205-211). The results from the survey could understate the universal sentiments held about animals, because not all anti-vivisectionists and vegetarians hold that animals posses rights. Further, it is not that all the people that regard animals have rights, view that they hold as much rights as human beings. For example, it is a fact that humans and all species of animals posses similar moral rights. For instance, humans hold the right to engage in their religious practices, and eagles hold the right to fly in the sky, but humans do not hold the right to flight, and neither do eagles hold rights to religious practices. The comparison shows that in the case that a given entity hold certain rights, the rights are linked to the capacity of the given entity. For example, only the creatures that can engage in religious practices hold the rights to practice religion, and only the creatures that can fly hold the right to flight. However, it is not that all capacities are linked to a given area of rights, for example, considering that humans hold the capacity to murder, but they do not hold the r