Essay on Candide a Satire on the Enlightenment - 604 Words

Candide is an outlandishly humorous, far-fetched tale by Voltaire satirizing the optimism espoused by the philosophers of the Age of Enlightenment. It is the story of a young mans adventures throughout the world, where he witnesses much evil and disaster. Throughout his travels, he adheres to the teachings of his tutor, Pangloss, believing that all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds. Candide is Voltaires answer to what he saw as an absurd belief proposed by the Optimists - an easy way to rationalize evil and suffering. Though he was by no means a pessimist, Voltaire refused to believe that what happens is always for the best.brbrThe Age of Enlightenment is a term applied to a wide variety of ideas and advances in†¦show more content†¦(526)brbrThe multitudes of disasters, which Candide endures, culminate in his eventual, if temporary, abandonment of optimism. When asked Whats optimism? by Cacambo, Candide replies, AlasÂ…it is a mania for saying things are w ell when one is in hell. (555) brbrCandide finally begins to recognize the futility of his dear Pangloss philosophy. Voltaire concludes Candide by having Candide discover the Turks truth to life - Â…the work keeps us from three great evils, boredom, vice and poverty. (584) Candide and his band of followers consider these words and decide that they must cultivate their garden. Even when the entire group has accepted the pastoral lifestyle, finding contentment, Pangloss the Optimist attempts to prove how all their prior misfortunes were parts of the necessary chain of events for them to reach happiness. Voltaire paints Pangloss as the true dolt of optimism, never realizing the errors of his own logic.brbrEven though a philosopher of the Enlightenment himself, Voltaire uses Candide as a platform to criticize the utter optimism of his fellows. His use of satire throughout the story has a serious purpose. Voltaire uses satire as a means of pointing out injustice, cruelty, andShow More RelatedEssay on Use of Satire to Attack Optimism in Voltaires Candide1358 Words   |  6 PagesUse of Satire to Attack Optimism in Voltaires Candide       In its time, satire was a powerful tool for political assault on Europes corrupt and deteriorating society. Voltaires Candide uses satire to vibrantly and sarcastically portray optimism, a philosophical view from the Enlightenment used to bury the horrors of 18th century life: superstition, sexually transmitted diseases, aristocracy, the church, tyrannical rulers, civil and religious wars, and the cruel punishment of the innocentRead MoreCandide by Voltaire847 Words   |  3 PagesCandide Paper Many critics argue that Candide is not an enlightened work, but Voltaire’s satire thoroughly reflects on the philosophical morals and lessons of the Enlightenment. Voltaire’s satire comments on the political, social, and religious views of the time, emphasizing the beliefs of a majority of enlightenment thinkers and philosophers. Voltaire demonstrates three different enlightenment thoughts or views in his work: anti-feudalism, optimism, and the hypocrisy of the Christian church.Read MoreSwifts ‘Gullivers Travel’ and Voltaires ‘Candide’ Essay663 Words   |  3 PagesSwift’s ‘Gulliver’s Travel’ and Voltaire’s ‘Candide’ Swift’s ‘Gulliver’s Travel’ and Voltaire’s ‘Candide’ are typical literature works during the Enlightenment period. Both authors use satire in their works. Satire is literary form which means irony. Therefore, they have some similarities. They both want to expose human vices through satiric tone. Due to different personal styles, there are many differences between two novels. Two novels use satire to criticize human weakness. In ‘Gulliver’sRead MoreThe Candide By The French Enlightenment1377 Words   |  6 PagesIn the novel Candide by the French Enlightenment writer and philosopher, Voltaire, the use of satire is highly prevalent. Voltaire took many of the follies and views he disagreed with during the Enlightenment and satirized them in this highly unrealistic and exaggerated novel. The events throughout the novel, even if they have some connections or roots in historical events, are seemingly preposterous and embellished because of Voltaire’s heavy use of satire. However, Voltaire merely uses these embellishmentsRead MoreVoltaire s View Of Candide1511 Words   |  7 Pages Voltaire s Candide is a satirical work written in 1759 as a commentary during the Enlightenment. One of Voltaire s most famous works, it also functioned to reflect Voltaire s opinions. Candide is considered Voltaire s signature work in which he levels his sharpest criticism against nobility, philosophy, the church, and human cruelty. Though often considered a representative text of the Enlightenment era, the novel criticizes a number of Enlightenment philosophies. As reading and books wereRead More`` Candide `` A Satire Of The Social, And The Scientific Revolution1608 Words   |  7 PagesThe Enlightenment was a time when authority was questioned, which enforced change. It emerged out of the Reformation, and the Scientific Revolution. The Reformation called for a reform of the catholic church. The Scientific Revolution called for moral, social, and political thought to rely on the scientific method and reason rather than the current system of tradition cultural authorities. These ch anges and ideas continued into the Enlightenment. During his time Franà §ois-Marie Arouet (1694-1778)Read MoreEssay on Voltaires Candide988 Words   |  4 PagesVoltaires Candide Candide is a reflection of the philosophical values of the Enlightenment. Voltaire’s novel is a satire of the Old Regime ideologies in which he critiques the political, social, and religious ideals of his time. A common intellectual characteristic of the Enlightenment was anti-feudalism. Philosophers were against the separations in the Old Regime and pushed for equality among human beings. Voltaire parodies the pompousness of the nobility several times throughoutRead MoreCandide : A Reflection Of The Enlightenment1325 Words   |  6 Pages Candide: A Reflection of the Enlightenment Francois-Marie Arouet, otherwise known as Voltaire was an 18th century French philosopher and writer during the Enlightenment period. Voltaire’s most famous work of literature; Candide follows a young man who grows up in a Baron’s castle (Castle Thunder-ten-tronckh), under the instruction of Dr. Pangloss, a tutor and philosopher who worships optimism even under extreme circumstances. Throughout Voltaire’s novel, Candide and his companions encounter aRead More A Comparison of the Quest for Enlightenment in Candide and Dream of the Red Chamber1209 Words   |  5 PagesQuest for Enlightenment in Candide and Dream of the Red Chamber      Ã‚   Seventeenth-century Europe saw the end of the Renaissance and ushered in the Neoclassic era. During this period, which is also called the Enlightenment and The Age of Reason, society advocated rationalism and urged the restraint of emotion. Writers modeled their works after the Greco-Roman satires and picaresque novels. At around the same time in China, the author of Dream of the Red Chamber explores a different kind ofRead MoreVoltaire s Candide : A Critique Of Politics And Religion During The Age Of Enlightenment1500 Words   |  6 Pagespublished Candide, ou l Optimisme simultaneously in five European countries in January of 1759, it was met with widespread denouncement due to its controversial content and scandalous portrayal of politics and religion. Nevertheless, the bitingly satirical novel fervently spread throughout Europe and was translated into several more languages, selling tens of thousands of copies within its first year of publication (Barnes). Despite being first categorized as dangerous blasphemy, Candide is now regarded

Sociological Factors Of Criminal Behavior Essay - 2085 Words

This paper will focus on the sociological factors of criminal behavior. This study will illustrate how society and other external influences drive an individual into committing crimes. Differential Association Theory and Strain Theory will be applied in this paper. Research by Agnew, Helfgott, Merton, Sharma, S., Sharma, G., Barkataki and others will be examined as well. Additionally, an experiment conducted by Patenoster, McGloin, Nguyen, Thomas and a story told by BBC will be used as an aid to a deeper understanding in the external factors of criminal behavior. The main focus centers around on how society and other external factors play a role in the development of criminal behavior. Keywords: crime, Differential Association Theory, Strain Theory, deviance, delinquency, media, society, copycat crime, external factors, criminal behavior Criminal behavior is defined as an act that violates the public law established by the government. Individuals exhibiting criminal behavior may be subjected to negative consequences such as imprisonment or death penalty. Criminal behavior is normally associated with deviance, which is the violations of norms (Henslin, 2017). The factors which influences the criminal behavior is often debated by researchers, whether they are acquired or inborn. Specifically, scientists who study sociobiology believe that genetic predispositions lead people to engage in deviant or criminal acts (Henslin, 2017). As the study of geneticsShow MoreRelatedtheories on crime comparison1138 Words   |  5 Pagespaper will provide information on sociological theory including the relationship between personality and criminal behavior according to sociological theory. Also, this paper will provide a comparison on each key elements on sociological theory, biological theory, and psychological theory. In addition, the paper will allow each reader to understand the philosophical basis for each theory. Sociological Theory Sociological theory identifies different social factors that connects individuals to crimeRead MoreTheories on Crime1253 Words   |  5 Pageschallenges in developing theories that explain human behavior. In relation to crime, human behavior varies because participants differ in backgrounds, experiences, and characteristics. However, several criminologists and other social scientists have made important contributions in explaining criminal behavior. These contributions have mainly involved the establishment of several theories on crime that focus on various aspects of criminal behavior. Some of the major theories on crime include classicalRead MoreWhy do individuals commit crimes?1381 Words   |  6 Pagesresearchers of all kinds have been persistent in analyzing criminals for an answer. The scholarly attention to crime from various perspectives has allowed for an extensive range of theories which are based on three broad theoretical approaches of explaining criminal behaviour. Th ese theoretical approaches, which focus on the causes of crime and deviance in modern society, are the biological approach, psychological approach and the sociological approach. First, the Biological Theory believes that anRead MoreThe Theory Of Body Types, And The Y Chromosome Theory1194 Words   |  5 Pages psychological, and sociological perspectives have applied their different thought processes to produce many theories. Some of these ideas have been discredited, however some remain significant today. Sociological theories differ from biological and psychological theories by looking at external factors rather than internal ones. Biological theories on deviance are the result of looking for answers that are specific to certain individuals, namely, criminals and non-criminals. Theorists in this respectRead MoreThe Theory Of Crime Causation871 Words   |  4 PagesSince then, criminologists have expanded on the idea and have developed new ways as to why people commit crime; all including theories such as biological, psychological, and sociological causes for crime (Siegel, 2013). Biological theories of crime made the assumptions that physical traits can lead an individual to criminal activities. Biological theories of crime causation were initially based on the assumption that delinquency is inherited. Physical attributes were known to pass down from parentRead MoreDigital Crime Theory And The Psychoanalytic Theory1017 Words   |  5 Pagesperform daily activities. (Hafner, K. et.al., 1995). The haste to clasp this new technology has led to unveiling of a new line of criminals and criminal activities, commonly referred as hackers and hacking respectively. For us to understand the criminal behavior of cyber criminals, it’s critical to examine the traditional psychological theories of the criminal behavior and their application to generate a breakthrough to understand hacking. The two primary cybercrime theories are the learning theoryRead MoreThe Theory Of Crime : The Classical View960 Words   |  4 Pagesview believes that a person’s decisions are not made due to free will, but shaped by society and the environment that they live in. From these two main views branched many different views to explain who or what may be responsible for crime; known as criminal behavioral theories. Influenced by the classical theory is the rational choice theory, all the other theories; biosocial, psychological, social learning, and social structure is influenced by the positivist view. The rational choice theory believesRead MoreSocial and Biological Reasoning Behind Crime1592 Words   |  7 Pagestheories for why criminals are criminals. These theories have been developed, changed, and even thrown out over the years. Each one has been contradicted and reaffirmed, until eventually there is a consensus for both biological and sociological reasons which would explain why a person would act criminally or participate in a criminal act/behavior. I argue that the most relevant theories to answering why a person would do these things are social disorganization and neurological factors, specificallyRead MoreThe Crime Of The Criminal Justice System845 Words   |  4 PagesThe criminal justice policy has many different aspects. This include the different theories of crime and how they have an impact the criminal justice system. Some of this theories are the Biological studies, Psychological theories, and last the Sociological theory all are used as different methods of exp laining why crime exists. Biological theories are the biological explanations of crime. A famous theorists Cesare Lombroso, founder of the Italian school of Positivist Criminology. His biologicalRead MoreIp3 Crime Causation1535 Words   |  7 PagesUnit 3 Crime Causation CRJS105-1201A-03 By Erika.Esquer1 1/22/2012 American InterContinental University Online Abstract This essay will focus on sociological theories of crime and their description, the strengths and weaknesses of each; sociological control theory, strain theory, differential association theory and neutralization theory. This essay will also focus on Rajartnam who was convicted for inside trading in 2011. Introduction A different approach to criminological theory was

The Concept of Justice Free Essays

string(156) " a person engaging in injustice will most likely become wealthy in physical attributes, he lacks the fundamental virtues and characteristics of a good man\." Socrates and Aristotle both have contrasting views of the concept of justice which serves to influence their notions of an ideal constitution. The abstract, speculative ideas of Socrates will be compared and contrasted with the practical, sensory ones of Aristotle in matters concerning justice and politics. Both Aristotle and Socrates disagree with regards to the definition of justice and what qualities are attributed to a just person. We will write a custom essay sample on The Concept of Justice or any similar topic only for you Order Now According to Aristotle, a just person must follow the law and refrain from greed. In the opinion of Socrates, greed consists of taking more than what is required to survive. He stresses the importance of prudence and temperance in the lives of a just person. Aristotle, however, states that a greedy person is someone who does not understand the difference between taking what is good and what is not good. A wealthy person can also be just. Aristotle provides two different types of justice which he labels distributive and rectifactory justice. Distributive justice is concerned with the distribution of money, honour, and other resources amongst those who have a share in public organization. Equality is of the greatest importance when distributing goods. Rectifactory justice concerns transactions between individuals in which both parties mutually exchange goods or services. Through both of these means Aristotle seeks to provide justice in the written law of his polis which is devoted to the advantage of all. However, Socrates views justice as the harmonious parts of the person or of a city. A just man, therefore, is in just the right place and doing his best to perform his function. He claims that the function of a human being is deliberation, ruling, living, and taking care of things. The ideas of Aristotle differ greatly from this perspective. He states that the human function is to perform activities that express reason. Socrates views his ideal city in which every person performs his or her function. His views pertain to the community in which a person lives while Aristotle’s views are more individualistic as someone who expresses reason in his logic can do so without other people or his community. In the Republic, Socrates attempts to illustrate his views with the parable of the ship. The unjust city is like an open ocean crewed by a powerful but drunken captain (representing the ignorant common people), a group of untrustworthy advisors (politicians), and a navigator (the philosopher). The only way the ship will reach its destination, the good, is if the navigator takes charge. Philosophers, who are lovers of wisdom, should rule because they understand what is good and just. It is also the opinion of Socrates that people who have been the victims of injustice are more likely to become unjust themselves. He disagrees with the notion that returning debts owed, helping friends, and harming enemies are not suitable reasons for doing injustice: â€Å"So if someone tells us it is just to give to each what he is owed and understands by this that a just man should harm his enemies and benefit his friends, the one who says it is not wise. I mean, what he says is not true. For it has become clear to us that it is never just to harm anyone† (Plato, Republic, 335e). A wise person would understand that it is not beneficial to his soul to do injustice only to his enemies. A wise person, according to Socrates would never harm anyone. He maintains that a kind just ruler judges what is best for his people and holds their interests in greater esteem than his friends or family: â€Å"†¦ No one in any position of rule†¦ considers or enjoins what is advantageous for himself, but what is advantageous for his subjects† (Plato, Republic, 342e). A ruler who performs acts of injustice is, by nature, more prone to corruption and tyranny. In this way he gives increased support to his argument concerning philosophers as rulers of the polis. Socrates and Aristotle also differ in their opinions as to which form of government is best to rule the polis. Socrates defends the notion that the city would best be governed by the philosopher-kings; a group of people who had endured rigorous mental and physical training for the majority of their lives. They would govern together as a group or an oligarchy. Aristotle recognizes the fact that it is possible for an oligarchy to degenerate into a tyranny, which is the worst possible state. He recommends the formation of a polity or a democracy as the lesser of two evils. Socrates draws a fine line between ignorance and wisdom. It is, in fact, recognizing what one does not know from what one knows. Therefore, if one cannot recognize the virtue of justice, one must be said to be ignorant: â€Å"†¦ if justice is indeed wisdom and virtue, it will be easy to show, I suppose, that it is stronger than injustice, since injustice is ignorance† (Plato, Republic, 351a). Wisdom is undoubtedly the more esteemed when compared with ignorance and consequently justice must be better esteemed than injustice. However, Socrates is confronted with arguments in favour of injustice. He attempts to defend justice as being more profitable than injustice: â€Å"†¦ that to do injustice is naturally good and to suffer injustice bad†¦ The best is to do injustice without paying the penalty; the worst is to suffer it without taking revenge† (Plato, Republic, 358e). In other words, it is acceptable and encouraged for someone to perform acts of injustice as long as he is not found out and does not suffer the consequences. If however, an act of injustice is carried out against someone, it is the duty of the victim to take revenge on him. Socrates points out that this course of action leads only to unimportant material gain. Thrasymachus claims that committing acts of injustice without being caught is more profitable to one’s reputation and would allow one to achieve more. Socrates acknowledges that although a person engaging in injustice will most likely become wealthy in physical attributes, he lacks the fundamental virtues and characteristics of a good man. You read "The Concept of Justice" in category "Essay examples" The virtue of something is the state or property that makes it good. For instance, the virtue of a man may include his intelligence, courage, or sense of justice. Justice, in this case, is a moral behaviour which is said to belong to virtuous people. Therefore, justice itself is a virtue. Thrasymachus’ argument has no merit because a man who strives to achieve more by acquiring material wealth through committing acts of injustice lacks the more esteemed virtues of wisdom and justice. It is also the opinion of Socrates that just people are happier and live better lives than unjust ones. He is, of course, talking about the happiness of the soul rather than its shell, the body. Much as the virtue of the eyes is to see and the virtue of the ears to hear, the virtue of the soul is justice: â€Å"†¦ ustice is a soul’s virtue and justice its vice† (Plato, Republic, 353e). It is more profitable for a person to be just than unjust, as he will be giving his soul its virtue and therefore living a happy life. Better is the poor man with a good just soul than the rich man who has made his wealth through vice with a tainted soul. However, it must be pointed out that although Socrates claims that justice leads to happiness, he deprives the rulers of his city of happiness, though they are supposed to be trained in justice and wisdom. As Aristotle states: â€Å"†¦ ven though Socrates deprives the guardians of their happiness, he says that the legislator should make the whole city-state happy. But it is impossible for the whole to be happy unless all, most, are some of its parts are happy† (Aristotle, Politics, 1264b). Socrates thought it was crucial that the guardians were not given the sort of happiness which would no longer make them guardians. For a potter who is given jewels and riches no longer practices the art of pottery and so is no longer considered a potter. Likewise, a guardian must not be given wealth or earthly comforts but remain content with his role. Aristotle argues that even if the guardian class is not happy, it is impossible for the craftsmen, farmers, and lower classes to be happy. Without happiness, there is no justice. Socrates also claims that just people are able to work together in order to achieve a common goal. He maintains that just people working together are able to get along without doing injustice amongst themselves: â€Å"†¦ just people are wiser and better and more capable of acting, while unjust ones are not even able to act together† (Plato, Republic, 352c). Injustice causes factions, hatreds, and quarrels among people and friends. A band of robbers with a common unjust purpose would not be able to achieve it if they are unjust amongst themselves. Injustice provides conditions in which it is impossible for people to work together. Therefore, injustice prevents the different parts of the soul from working together toward a common goal. In the case of friendship and justice, Socrates and Aristotle seem to be in mutual accord. Aristotle believes friendship and comradeship to be one of the key components of leading a good life. He viewed justice as the equitability or fairness in interpersonal relations. Virtuous habits can be acquired within a moral community which ultimately leads to a virtuous and moral life. Socrates believes that the nature of the state is analogous with the nature of the individual and the nature of the soul. The soul comprises of three key principles which he calls reason, appetite, and spirit. Justice in the individual is harmony among the principles of the soul achieved by rationality and reason. He believes that the guardians have achieved harmony within their souls and so must be considered just. Since the faculties of an individual correspond on a smaller scale to that of the state, justice must also exist in the individual. Socrates believes in unity, as expressed by his confidence in the ability of just people to work together and of the family structure in the Republic. Women and children are to be shared communally by the guardians. No one woman, child, or possession is to belong to one man but rather to be shared by the whole. The well-being of the polis is placed before the well-being of an individual. Aristotle agrees that unity needs to be present to a certain extent within a city but alleges that a man who can call something his own takes more pride in it. He loves a son he can call his own more than a boy who is a son of every man. He also takes more pride in his work when he knows that what he is producing will benefit himself and his family. Socrates claims that temperance is the path to happiness and virtue and a person should only own what he needs to live temperately. Aristotle disagrees with this notion and states that it is possible to live temperately and wretchedly; the lack of property does not necessarily lead to a good life. A good person can be good even independently of the society. However, a good person is a good citizen and a good citizen can exist only as a part of the social structure. In this way, the state is, in a sense, prior to the citizen. It is evident Socrates and Aristotle share the common belief that justice is undoubtedly more beneficial than injustice. However, their definitions of justice vary greatly. The main and most crucial difference between the perspectives of Aristotle and Socrates is their view of friendship and unity. Aristotle believes that the virtue of justice encompasses all other virtues because it treats the interactions between people rather than just the dispositions of the individual. Socrates believes that the virtue of justice is first and foremost beneficial to one’s soul. Despite their contrasting views, both Aristotle and Socrates believe that justice is one of the highest and most sought after virtues. If one is to have a good life, one must be just. How to cite The Concept of Justice, Essay examples