After Reading And Evaluating Jonathan Swift's Modest Proposa

After Reading And Evaluating Jonathan Swifts Modest Proposal Pleas

After reading and evaluating Jonathan Swift’s “Modest Proposal,” please choose a topic of interest and write your own modest proposal. The topic should be specific and you should include techniques we have discussed this semester, such as balanced appeals based on the Rhetorical Triangle and clear claims, reasons, and assumptions. This is an opportunity for you to hold a mirror to a social issue or problem that interests you but that goes unnoticed or is difficult to discuss. Please be sure the issue is “real” and worthy of the effort and discussion. Also, remember that satire is not an opportunity to be blatantly offensive, so be sure to maintain focus on thinking critically about an issue.

And remember, if the satire has to be explained, then it didn’t work as intended and likely is not funny or effective. The format should be similar to Swift’s proposal: 1-Identify the problem 2-Explore your outrageous solution, including clear logical appeals 3-Explain why your ideas are valid 4-Introduce the “real” solutions to your problem and explain why they obviously will not work. Requirements: 2-3 pages, professional tone and clear purpose, clear use of satire, obvious use of the Rhetorical Triangle.

Paper For Above instruction

Jonathan Swift’s “A Modest Proposal” remains one of the sharpest examples of satirical writing, effectively criticizing the social and economic policies of the 18th century Ireland through hyperbolic and provocative proposals. Inspired by Swift’s mastery, I propose to critically examine the ongoing issue of excessive smartphone dependency among teenagers. While this problem is visibly pervasive, its underlying implications often go unnoticed, making it a fitting subject for satire that aims to spark critical discussion about societal priorities and individual habits.

The problem at hand is the widespread addiction to smartphones among adolescents, which manifests in decreased social skills, impaired mental health, and a decline in academic performance. This dependency fosters a culture of instant gratification and superficial interactions, ultimately eroding the fabric of genuine human connection. The root of this issue lies in the unchecked proliferation of social media platforms and the commercialization of digital devices, which leverage psychological hooks to keep users engaged. The societal approval given to constant connectivity creates an environment where teenagers feel obliged to remain perpetually glued to their devices, often at the expense of real-world experiences and relationships.

In response to this problem, I propose an outrageous solution: mandatory “device-free zones” in all public spaces, including schools, parks, and transportation hubs, where no smartphones or digital devices are allowed. To enforce this, I suggest deploying “digital police”—trained personnel armed with the authority to confiscate smartphones on sight. These zones could be decorated with engaging activities like communal games, outdoor classes, and artistic murals aimed at reconnecting individuals with real-world interactions. This solution appeals to logical reasoning by emphasizing the importance of face-to-face communication and community bonding, echoing Swift’s use of hyperbolic measures to satirize the absurdity of societal complacency.

My proposal is valid because it highlights, through exaggeration, the absurd lengths society might go to address a seemingly intractable problem. It underscores how superficial solutions—like simply banning devices—might seem straightforward but are ultimately insufficient without systemic change. Such measures mock the idea that technological dependency can be easily curtailed through restrictive policies, hence drawing attention to the deeper cultural issues at play. Swift’s use of satire frequently exposes the gap between surface-level solutions and the complex realities of social problems, which I aim to emulate here.

Real solutions involve education reform that promotes digital literacy, parental involvement, and mental health support. Schools could incorporate curricula that teach responsible digital use, and parents could set boundaries to foster healthier habits. Yet, these approaches often face resistance due to cultural inertia, economic interests, and a lack of awareness. Governments and communities tend to favor quick fixes over transformative change, making systemic efforts unlikely or slow to materialize. By exaggeratedly suggesting physical barricades and digital enforcers, my proposal underscores how complex and resistant to simple fixes this issue truly is, echoing Swift’s critique of societal complacency and misplaced priorities.

References

• Swift, J. (1729). A Modest Proposal. Project Gutenberg.
• Twenge, J. M. (2017). iGen: Why Today’s Super-Connected Kids Are Growing Up Less Rebellious, More Tolerant, Less Happy—and Completely Unprepared for Adulthood—and What That Means for the Rest of Us. Atria Books.
• Orben, A., & Przybylski, A. K. (2019). The association between adolescent well-being and digital technology use. Nature Human Behaviour, 3(2), 173-182.
• Subrahmanyam, K., & Smahel, D. (2011). Digital youth: The role of media in development. Springer Science & Business Media.
• Lenhart, A. (2015). Teens, social media & technology overview 2015. Pew Research Center.
• Kuss, D. J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2017). Social networking sites and addiction: ten lessons learned. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(3), 311.
• Radesky, J. S., Schumacher, J., & Zuckerman, B. (2015). Mobile and interactive media use by young children: The good, the bad, and the unknown. Pediatrics, 135(1), 1-3.
• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
• Horrigan, J. B. (2016). The State of Digital Privacy and Security. Pew Research Center.
• Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. (2008). Parental mediation of children’s internet use. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 52(4), 581-599.