Core ideology essay

Hello i wrote an essay on Liberalism, and hope for someone to mark it for me if possible. Thank you!!

Q: To what extent do Liberals agree on the idea of society

A: Liberalism is a political phylosophy that is based on core ideologies such as individualism, equality and liberty. Hence all liberals share the common idea that an optimal society will grant liberties to each individual to allow them act upon their own freedom to pursue their own interest despite societal expectations. Liberals also agree that despite society being atomistic, people will do care about the wellbeing of others and so support equality of opportunity.
However, within this broad area of agreement liberals disagree on the extent of how progressive and tolerant society should be. This clear divide is seen how classical liberals show a stricter view upon society’s progressiveness. Seen through Locke, a classical liberal thinker that shares an overall positive view on society. This is challenged by modern liberals who fear that society may not be welcoming enough for all individuals to pursue their own interests. This is seen through Rawls who fears “social tyranny” and so believes that society should be further progressed to suit individual. Ultimately, despite there being tension on how much society is progressive in allowing individuals to pursue their interest, there is a greater agreement over the belief that society should accommodate individuals to pursue their won interests.

One thing that unites all liberals is that they view society to be a collection of individuals, with each their own rights and freedom. This stems from the core ideology of individualism, specifically egotistical individualism, highlighting how greatly liberals endeavour this value within society. This is seen through CL Thinker J.Locke: he sees humans as self-interested, and therefore mutually indifferent to each other. This idea is also supported by a ML Thinker J.Rawls; who states that “people are rational and mutually self-interested” and that “ultimately they prioritise themselves, desiring as much as freedom as possible”. Due to this shared belief of human nature adopting selfish qualities, they argue that society should be atomistic, meaning that it must accommodate each individual’s needs to allow them to pursue their own liberty and self-interest with utter freedom. Hence all liberals to a large extent agree upon an atomistic society due to their shared opinion on human nature.

Another agreement that is share between both strands of liberalism, is that despite their support for an atomistic society, people nonetheless care about the well being of others’. Hence all liberals agree that society should promote equality of opportunity. As CL Thinker J.Locke; said that natural reason means humans are concerned for others and appreciate importance of natural rights to be protected. Hence society as a whole to an extent must collaborate and care for others so that they’re not face with unjust rights. This is further supported by ML Thinker J.Rawls: who argues that individual hide behind a “veil of ignorance”. Suggesting that the average rational and self-interested person would choose impartial, fair principles, stripped of prejudice and selfishness. Hence, all liberals think alike and want to promote equality of opportunity within an atomistic society so that each individual is not stripped from their natural rights.

However, despite these agreements there is great tension between the liberal thinkers ; Locke and the others differ in opinions of the extent of how progressive and tolerant society in reality is and how well it allows the interests of individuals to be protected.This is seen how classical liberal thinker J.Locke had an overall optimistic view on society. This is supported by J.Locke who argued that humans are rational enough through which are more than capable in making rational decisions. Hence implying that society judgements should be trusted. However disagreement also emerges between thinkers in same strand. Mary.Wollstonecraft, a classical liberal thinker differs in opinion to Locke. She argues that society is not nearly as progressive enough since society was forcing conditions on women which led to their “infantilization”. Hence she argued that without the bettering of women’s education and allowing them to fulfil natural and equal abilities, society as a whole could not move progress: “She will stop the progress of knowledge and virtue”.This is further supported by Betty friedan a modern liberal thinker who also claims that societal discrimination was depriving women from their natural rights and freedoms. Hence Friedan + Wolstencroft argue against Locke claiming that society is not progressive enough to allow all individuals to pursue their own interests and have their natural rights protected. This also further supported by J.Rawls who fears that “social tyranny” will block individuals from pursuing their needs by being forced to comply with “societal norms”. Hence Rawls agrees that there needs to be further progression to society

Overall, there is clear disagreement between liberals on the idea of ow progressive society is in reality, as seen through Locke and Wolstencroft. However, this disagreement is rendered weak and therefore in reality disagree to a smaller extent, since the majority of liberal thinkers excluding Locke argue that society itself should always strive to be progressive and tolerant in order for individuals to pursue their own interests and have their natural rights preserved. This is was predominantly presented through Frieddan and Wolstencrofts claims that society was held back due to the discrimination implemented upon women forcing them to not fully attain their natural rights. Additionally, all liberals approve that society must be atomistic but with equality of opportunity being promoted in order to support their value of individualism. Hence Liberals agree on the idea of society to a larger extent that they disagree with it.

Reply 1

Tinkerbelle017

I would say make ur argument in the intro more clear as you have done in your conclusion. its good that u have some context on liberalism.
There is balance in the essay.

I'm horrible at giving a mark since I'm a student myself but I would say this is a L4 answer