10/19 right to overthrow the monarch; Rousseau, on

10/19 Utilitarianism:  The best action is the one that maximize the unity. Sounds great. But what if we are living in the city of omela. And your were the kid that’s been trapped in the basement, suffering all the pain and living without any hope? I think those people who left omela were those who think human rights and human dignity transcend utilitarianism and try to practice that principle. Even if that choice means they have to abandon everything they now enjoy. As for the place they want to go, it doesn’t seem to be appered in human history and it is unlikely to be reach in the foreseeable future. But it’s still worth a try.  10/24 & 10/26 The Social Contract and Libertarianism: Social Contract: The conflicts within these theories are obvious.In the state of nature, Hobbes believed that because human nature were evil, human would fall into a war in the state of nature, and only the sovereign could bring peace; Rousseau, in contrast, believes that human nature is good, and the state of nature is good, and with the emergence of private ownership, people begin to fall into the killing, and therefore need the social contract to guarantee freedom.In the polity, Hobbes argues that the monarchy is the best system, that sovereignty should be concentrated in one person, and people have no right to overthrow the monarch; Rousseau, on the other hand, is on the opposite side of Hobbes, who believes that the overthrow of the tyrant is perfectly justified. As an citizen, we are involved in the social contract. For example, a registered permanent residence, car’s contract after you brought a car. There’s a contract for buying and selling stuff. The company shall abide by the rules and regulations of the company; Our marriage has some kind of contract. And whether it’s self-employed or private enterprises, it should be licensed. The doctors and lawyers needs to examine the qualification certificate. It’s all part of the social contract.  Libertarianism:  I think It faces three limitations. First, contrary to the “moral law,” An example is to help other suicide. Some people seek help from physicians because they lose confidence in their lives, hoping physician can help themselves (such as death by injection). Both parties agree not to assume the corresponding responsibilities, but we still think it’s a mistake to assist in suicide because respecting a person’s life is one of the most fundamental moralities of mankind. This is the law’s rebuttal of absolute morality.The second limitation is the degradation or corruption of certain things, which is more evident in the free market. Free market for profit, where money is earned, where you can introduce market elements. But in fact this is extremely unreasonable. For example, there is a “market prison,” in which prisoners can escape labor by paying a certain amount of money to the prison and being held in a cell in a better environment. This is obviously profitable. Can increase national income, but is it fair?  Does it against the justice? Therefore, absolute market freedom is not desirable.The third limitation lies in the negative impact on the whole society, including the aggravating gap between the rich and the poor and the intensification of social conflicts. 10/31-11/2 Socialism and Liberal Egalitarianism: Socialism: After reading the camping story, I think this is not a real socialism, the socialist model of camping trip seems to be feasible, because of its small size, short time and less work, these simple works and collaborate more like a primitive tribal society, The reason why people are able to do this in camping trips is because people are not camping every day and traveling on an equal footing. Strangeness, freshness will allow people to temporarily forbear, humility and put away their own personality, but this can not last long. People will show their selfishness as time move on. No matter how you elaborate in theory, I still think that selfish human nature is the biggest obstacle to implementing true socialism, and this nature can’t easily changed after a few days of reading books, few years of educations. You can not generalize the behavior of people at one moment as their human nature. What I really care about is whether you can make our life more stable and healthier. If your system is nominally superior than any social system in the past, but you can not effectively implement it and can not let your people realize the superiority of this system in your life, everything is worthless. Liberal Egalitarianism: Why does the idea of equal opportunity appear to be fair and appealing in modern society? Because it makes people’s destiny decided by their own choice rather than by their environment. If I pursue some personal interests in a society of equal opportunities, then my success and failure will be determined by my achievements, not race, class or gender. In a society where no one is in a favorable or disadvantaged position because of their social environment, the success or failure of people will be the result of their own choices and efforts. Therefore, any success we achieve is earned’, not just given to us. In an equal opportunity society, income inequality is fair, because success is achieved by hard work, and success belongs to those who are entitled to it. 11/7-11/9 Oppression: Will Racism and Sexism disappear if the wealth, job, power were distributed evenly? I don’t think so. Because it’s impossible to do so. Even this could happen, oppression will still exist due to our greedy and jealous. It’s our human nature. 11/14-11/16 Nihilism & Existentialism: This time I want to discuss nihilism and existentialism. I think nihilism is pretty absurd. If everyone agrees with nihilism, there is no suffering in this world, Happiness is no longer a pleasure for us. People are not worth caring about each other, nor should they care. They are just waiting for death.My question is, can you really do that? Survival is a basic human nature. When you are in danger, you’ll always try a way to survive. So I think not everything is pointless. At least, you still have to live a life. I think nihilism keeps society and individuals away from real life, people lost their motivation and creativity.  For existentialism, I do agree with some points. It says that we were born to find out our own essence. It doesn’t exist first, we had to create our own path in order to find it. In existentialism, there is bad faith. Which means that you follow others instruction instead of yours. The government, teachers, parents are just like you. They don’t have an answer first, they find their own way and tell people what to do. By all means, you can do that too.   11/28-11/30? The Velveteen Rabbit: What is real? Do you really exist? How do you define your existent ? In the story of The Velveteen Rabbit it explained that love is what define your existent. You can have all these physical features such as brain, hands, legs, nose etc. But in this story, You are real when you have your own emotion and be able to feel the love that others give you. With all that said, I think you are real when you are trying to prove that you exist through observation, learning, understanding of the world.   12/5-12/8 Stoicism:Stoicism, like many philosophical and religious theories, found that human suffering stems from their own desires. And therefore, it also emphasizes the importance of control of desire, but it does not reject material enjoyment, and it does not advocate the kind of ascetic practice. The most important reminder to us is: don’t put the foundation of happiness on the physical side. These ideas are not new to us, but they are more systematic. They have not only theory but also practice. For example, the negative imagination: what would we do if we were at the last moment of our lives? It’s the imagination that allows our desires not to be placed on temptations other than