Is it true that the Society (1) is at the service of the individual (2) and / or the individual (2) is at the service of the Society (1)?
Since antiquity the notion of individual in a group exists, family, tribe, nation, group, association, party, etc ...
There are also different opinions due to some distinct origins, Such as ethics, religions, democracy, socialism, capitalism, bourgeoisie, globalization, etc ..
After all these attempts, theories, philosophies, etc. Is there an optimal choice for this time? Or the problem is still not solved scientifically? What is it that dominates now?
As for myself, I share Aristotle's view, according to which humans are social/sociable/political animals, whose identity is based on their belonging to certain groups.Therefore, while I certainly go for the modern notion of individual liberty, I stil think that a concern for the goup is prior to any liberties one can enjoy, as provided by the groups he or she is member of.
By one eye of Physical Sciences, I believe that there is a dynamic equilibrium in which sometimes lasts a well definite state, sometimes it moves to an another one.
Sometimes it is a reversible transformation, sometimes irreversible, under the conditions that govern the space where it is!
As for myself, I share Aristotle's view, according to which humans are social/sociable/political animals, whose identity is based on their belonging to certain groups.Therefore, while I certainly go for the modern notion of individual liberty, I stil think that a concern for the goup is prior to any liberties one can enjoy, as provided by the groups he or she is member of.
I am a poet, I am an individual!
I write poetry for the Society, I am at the service of the Society!
I hope as a feedback, I will receive some positive services from the Society!
Interesting question. we need some philosophy for better responding. I will try: Any person can not live alone without society. So a person needs society. Living in a society obliges persons to respect the rules of the society. This which make the difference between a civilized and uncivilized society. So , society needs individual to follow its rules. Thus the vicious circle closes, perhaps...
Dear @Noureddine, there is complementarity of society and its citizens - the individuals. There is no one without other. We do all belong to the society. According to Simmel, "Society and the individuals that compose it, constitute an interdependent duality."
Very good question. Instead of saying duality we can say society - individual dualism.
Thank you Dr. Sribas Goswami,
I'm not a expert in the matter, I will correct the title.
An example:
I am an advisor, I think I am in the service of the society when I try to transmit the maximum of my skills to my students. After that, through time, my students will be in my services in one way or another. There is a reciprocity.
The duality society-individual is like a mother and her baby, in the beginning of the individual life: the fellow is only a consumer, he has only rights. Then, becoming adult, he has duties and rights
Hi All,
With all my respect Dear Noureddine Ouerfelli I don't agree with your "Analogy" society-individual and mother-baby because first both are individuals and both have duties and rights.
I think that the relation is a mutual interest between Individuals-Aggregations (Groups as System of Systems or Eco-System).
Regardless of any theories or philosophies the relation is based on Roles/Functionalities (Services):
Sincerely, Djamel.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Philosophy