Individualism and Communilism
Communalism and Individualism
How far can a person go in life without the need of others? Is it possible for him or her to achieve success without having any sort of social dynamic to aid in the progress of their lives? Does having strong social connections aid a person in shaping his or her character to achieve their goals and can these achievement be defined as his or her own if there was intervention of any sort from a social group? It is possible to deduce answers to such notions upon a better understanding of the distinction of community and the individual and the effects of these ideas on each other.
The following essay will try to define the distinction between the ideas of communalism and individualism. It will try to isolate the characteristics of each ideal in order to better comprehend their influence on a person life and try to provide an argument on why these two ideas may need to work together in order for a person to lead a fulfilling life.
Communitarianism defines the idea where the individual needs of a person are secondary to the overall development of the social group he or she communes. The social group can be represents as any group of people that share common goals and ideals. Possible factors that define ideals of the group include ethnic background, social or economic status, religious and cultural beliefs. Constant social interaction is important with this ideal. It is communitarian teleology that humankind is social by nature and that this idea grows naturally to this end.
Aristotle was a proponent of communitarianism and – according to class lectures on the subject – believed that being part of a community eased the burden of everyday living. He provided an example on the natural development of speech as a direct result of the necessity of humans to interact with each other to participate in a community. He also hypothesized that in order for human development to flourish there needs to be a sharing of skills and ideas within the
How far can a person go in life without the need of others? Is it possible for him or her to achieve success without having any sort of social dynamic to aid in the progress of their lives? Does having strong social connections aid a person in shaping his or her character to achieve their goals and can these achievement be defined as his or her own if there was intervention of any sort from a social group? It is possible to deduce answers to such notions upon a better understanding of the distinction of community and the individual and the effects of these ideas on each other.
The following essay will try to define the distinction between the ideas of communalism and individualism. It will try to isolate the characteristics of each ideal in order to better comprehend their influence on a person life and try to provide an argument on why these two ideas may need to work together in order for a person to lead a fulfilling life.
Communitarianism defines the idea where the individual needs of a person are secondary to the overall development of the social group he or she communes. The social group can be represents as any group of people that share common goals and ideals. Possible factors that define ideals of the group include ethnic background, social or economic status, religious and cultural beliefs. Constant social interaction is important with this ideal. It is communitarian teleology that humankind is social by nature and that this idea grows naturally to this end.
Aristotle was a proponent of communitarianism and – according to class lectures on the subject – believed that being part of a community eased the burden of everyday living. He provided an example on the natural development of speech as a direct result of the necessity of humans to interact with each other to participate in a community. He also hypothesized that in order for human development to flourish there needs to be a sharing of skills and ideas within the