Edmund Burke seems to be the person in which tells of a world that can never exist. At least that is what I believe. He talks about the liberties given to us by our forefathers. He talks about our rights “by this means our constitution preserves a unity in so great a diversity of its parts. We have an inheritable crown; an inheritable peerage; and a House of Commons and a people inheriting privileges, franchises, and liberties, from a long line of ancestors” (49). When talking about these liberties he talks and the policies which create those liberties are made from humans. When Burke talks about us “preserving the method of nature we retain, we are never wholly obsolete” (49), the past is what makes us and we must try to understand how to change it for the better good. That is one aspect that must be seen in order for us to create liberties for everyone. The next thing that got my attention was his idea for the real rights of men. The rights of men seem to be significant factors in previous times where a person was worth how much he had, and how much he contributed to the group. But this same idea can be used in modern terms in that a person owning stock of a company has a say in the group but doesn’t have any real power. They are able to give their beliefs about what the company is doing but they do no have the right to control the path of that company. But each person has that certain right of having their own opinion and their right to express that opinion. One idea it seems to make me upset is when he states that homicide that benefits people is the most pardonable (53). However naïve it may seem, murder is murder and it is never excusable, especially if it benefits others. The way Burke states it makes it seems very selfish in when it is excusable to murder; I think it is better if the overall way of life gets better and not just a certain few, it might become pardonable.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Joe,
ReplyDeleteI am glad to see you posting on your blog now. However, it is very close to the deadline, so I am afraid you won't get to benefit from any evaluations of problems. Unfortunately, there are some problems here.
On the positive side, you do focus on a single text and provide some quotations from Burke's writings. However, you don't go into much depth or detail discussing those passages. Also, there are some problems in form (syntax and wording, which make for example your first sentence pretty incoherent) and content (such as when you claim that Burke approves of some murders, which is in fact the opposite of what he ways). These issues seriously weaken your post, and I am concerned they may be a recurring problem in subsequent posts.