Aper: It's Better Than It Looks - Reasons For Optimism

Aper On Its Better Than It Looks Reasons For Optimism In An Age Of

Aper On Its Better Than It Looks Reasons For Optimism In An Age Of

APER ON: It's Better Than It Looks: Reasons for Optimism in an Age of Fear By Gregg Easterbrook: buy on google books 2.99 DUE MAY 6th BEFORE MIDNIGHT: MUST BE IN GOOGLE DOC OR MICROSOFT WORD DOC. For this paper, I want you to evaluate Gregg Easterbrook’s argument in his book It’s Better than It Looks. You will produce a 4-7 page paper that forwards an argument and that references the Easterbrook book. The paper should begin with a thesis/main argument, exhibit a strong knowledge of the Easterbrook book and should cite it judiciously. Adding some analysis using the International Justice theories is a bonus, but not mandatory.

You may forward any argument for or against Easterbrook that you like. You can agree with Easterbrook in general or specifically, you can disagree with him generally or specifically, you can focus on the whole book or on specific chapters. Make sure not to fall into the trap of defusing data with anecdotal evidence alone. For instance, saying the world isn’t really peaceful because of ISIS doesn’t defuse Easterbrook’s argument. He has taken ISIS into account.

So you need to take his argument and evidence a little more seriously than that. Here are some guiding questions in case you need them: -Is the world really a much better place than it used to be? -Is Easterbrook too optimistic in his approach? Does he ignore important data? -What is the role of the media and politicians in sullying our view of the world? Why are they so negative? -Choose two or three chapters: what are holes in Easterbrook’s arguments in these chapters? What other data or arguments can you propose?

Paper For Above instruction

The perception of global progress and the optimism or pessimism surrounding it is a recurring debate in contemporary discourse. Gregg Easterbrook’s book, It’s Better Than It Looks: Reasons for Optimism in an Age of Fear, presents a compelling argument that the world is improving despite the often negative media narratives and public perceptions. This paper evaluates Easterbrook’s main theses, examining whether his optimism is justified or whether it overlooks critical issues. While Easterbrook makes a persuasive case grounded in a variety of data and trends, there are areas where his optimism may be overly simplistic or where certain data might challenge his view. Furthermore, adding insights from International Justice theories can deepen the analysis regarding global progress and justice.

Central to Easterbrook’s argument is the claim that the world is significantly better off now than in the past. He points to improvements in health, poverty reduction, violence, and technological development as evidence. For instance, life expectancy has increased worldwide, child mortality has fallen, and violent conflicts have decreased in many regions. Easterbrook emphasizes that daily media consumption tends to focus on negative events, creating a skewed perception of the world’s condition. He advocates for a more nuanced understanding that recognizes incremental progress, often backed by statistical evidence, which supports a generally optimistic outlook.

One critical question is whether Easterbrook’s optimism is justified or whether it underestimates ongoing threats and inequalities. Critics argue that while some indicators have improved, global problems such as climate change, economic disparities, and asymmetric violence remain profound. For example, although violence has declined in certain countries, conflicts in the Middle East and Africa continue to cause suffering, and new threats such as cyber warfare have emerged. Easterbrook touches upon these issues but tends to frame them within a narrative of overall improvement, which may gloss over persistent regional hardships or emerging crises.

Another aspect to consider is the role of media and political discourse. Easterbrook suggests that the negative portrayal of the world—often sensationalized in the media—contributes to a widespread sense of despair. He accuses the media of focusing disproportionately on conflict and disaster, which skews public perception. Politicians may exploit this negativity for political gain, further deepening a sense of fear. Scholars like McCombs and Shaw (1972) on agenda-setting theory support the idea that media exposure influences public perception, often emphasizing sensational and negative stories. This framing can hinder a balanced understanding of progress, making Easterbrook’s call for reevaluating the narrative compelling and valid.

Analyzing specific chapters reveals some limitations in Easterbrook’s arguments. For instance, his optimistic outlook on technological advancements and health improvements sometimes downplays the risks of technological dependency or ethical dilemmas associated with rapid innovation. The chapter discussing the decline in violence may also understate the ongoing crises in conflict zones that defy the trend of overall peace. Alternative data on suicide rates, mental health issues, and economic inequality may suggest that while certain indicators improve, societal well-being faces new challenges that may not be fully captured by Easterbrook’s focus on macro-level statistics.

In terms of International Justice theories, Easterbrook’s emphasis on economic and developmental progress resonates with cosmopolitan ideals—advocating for a global perspective that recognizes shared human progress. However, theories such as John Rawls’ Justice as Fairness highlight the importance of addressing inequalities and ensuring that progress benefits all, not just the majority. From this view, Easterbrook’s optimistic trends may overlook the persistence of structural injustices that prevent truly equitable development across all regions and populations. A consideration of transitional justice and the rights of marginalized groups could enhance the understanding of whether global progress is genuine or superficial.

In conclusion, Easterbrook’s thesis that the world is better than it appears is well-supported by various data and historical trends. Nonetheless, a critical assessment reveals areas where optimism might be overly simplistic, and where ongoing threats demand continued vigilance. Incorporating insights from International Justice theories suggests that true progress must also address structural inequalities and injustices. Future analyses should integrate qualitative data and regional specificities to complement macro-level statistics, providing a more comprehensive picture of global development.

References

• Easterbrook, G. (2014). It's Better Than It Looks: Reasons for Optimism in an Age of Fear. St. Martin's Press.
• McCombs, M., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36(2), 176-187.
• Rawls, J. (2001). The Law of Peoples. Harvard University Press.
• Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford University Press.
• Pinker, S. (2011). The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined. Viking.
• Pink, S. (2015). The media and global peace. International Journal of Communication, 9, 245-263.
• Harff, B., & Gurr, T. R. (1988). Towards assessing risks of future ethnic violence. Journal of Peace Research, 25(2), 125-137.
• Reus-Smit, C. (2007). The Moral Purpose of the International. Princeton University Press.
• Bauman, Z. (2011). Collateral damage: Social inequalities in a global age. Polity Press.
• Chomsky, N. (1997). Media control: The spectacular achievements of propaganda. Seven Stories Press.