Digital Divider Erik Cartboygen 499 General Education Capsto ✓ Solved

Digital Divideerik Cartboygen499 General Education Capstonejo

Compare and contrast the interpretations of human agency by John Stuart Mill and Friedrich Nietzsche, considering their views on what it means to be human, their understanding of Truth, Freedom of Thought and Expression, and the significance of Individuality. Additionally, analyze how their perspectives on human agency influence their ideas about the purpose and nature of politics.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The philosophical visions of John Stuart Mill and Friedrich Nietzsche offer contrasting yet insightful perspectives on human agency, the core of individual existence and societal functioning. Mill, the proponent of utilitarianism and liberal thought, emphasizes the importance of individual liberty, rationality, and the pursuit of Truth. On the other hand, Nietzsche challenges conventional notions of selfhood and truth, emphasizing the depths of human unconsciousness, the fluidity of morals, and the creative power of the individual. This essay explores their differing interpretations concerning human nature and examines how these interpretations shape their political philosophies.

Mill’s Interpretation of Human Agency

John Stuart Mill views human agency fundamentally as the capacity for rational choice, moral development, and the pursuit of individual happiness within a framework that promotes social progress. Mill's conception is rooted in Enlightenment ideals emphasizing reason, empirical evidence, and the capacity of individuals to discern Truth through education and open discourse. He advocates for liberty of thought and expression as essential to human agency, asserting that the suppression of ideas hinders societal advancement (Mill, 1859).

For Mill, Truth is an objective pursuit, accessible through rational inquiry and free debate. The development of individuality and personal autonomy is central to human agency because these traits enable humans to contribute authentically to societal well-being. The importance of individual liberty derives from the belief that a society best benefits when its members freely pursue their personal pursuits—so long as they do not harm others (Mill, 1859).

This understanding informs Mill’s conception of politics as a mechanism to protect individual rights and promote social progress through free speech and democratic participation. His liberal approach emphasizes limited government intervention, emphasizing the importance of safeguarding personal freedoms that allow authentic self-development and exploration of Ideas.

Nietzsche’s Interpretation of Human Agency

Friedrich Nietzsche offers a radically different view, reframing human agency as an expression of the will to power—a fundamental drive for self-overcoming and creation of values. Nietzsche challenges the notion of an objectively definable Truth, instead asserting that all truths are perspectival and tied to individual instincts and cultural contexts (Nietzsche, 1886). He believes that humans are largely unaware of their unconscious drives, which shape their actions more profoundly than rational deliberation (Nietzsche, 1886).

Nietzsche emphasizes the importance of individuality in terms of authenticity, creativity, and the affirmation of life, often critiquing the herd mentality underlying conventional morality. The "Übermensch" or Overman embodies the autonomous individual who creates their own values beyond societal norms (Nietzsche, 1883). The process of self-discovery, often fraught with conflict, is central to Nietzsche’s notion of human agency, which involves embracing vitality, passion, and the capacity to forge new meanings.

Nietzsche’s philosophy profoundly influences his political outlook, advocating for a revaluation of values rather than a political doctrine rooted in equality or liberty. His view of politics is intertwined with the affirmation of individual greatness and the potential for cultural renewal through exceptional individuals challenging morality and norms (Nietzsche, 1886).

Comparison and Contrast

Mill’s conception of human agency is characterized by a belief in rationality, moral development, and the pursuit of truth through dialogue and education. His emphasis on individual liberty aligns with Enlightenment values, promoting a political system that protects personal freedoms to foster societal progress. Conversely, Nietzsche perceives human agency as rooted in unconscious drives, creativity, and the pursuit of self-mastery beyond societal constraints. His focus on individual authenticity and the creation of new values departs sharply from Mill’s reliance on rational consensus and objective truth.

While Mill advocates for open discourse and the collective pursuit of truth as essential for human development, Nietzsche warns against the dominance of collective morality and urges individuals to transcend conformist thought to achieve true self-actualization. Their divergent views of truth—Mill’s as an attainable objective and Nietzsche’s as perspectival—shape their contrasting visions of politics: Mill’s liberal democracy versus Nietzsche’s call for cultural and moral revaluation through exceptional individuals.

Implications for Politics

Mill’s understanding of human agency fosters a political philosophy centered on safeguarding individual rights, promoting free expression, and encouraging social progress through democratic institutions. His emphasis on rational debate and liberty aims to cultivate an environment where individuals can explore their capacities and contribute to collective well-being.

Nietzsche’s perspective, emphasizing individual创創iveness, vitality, and the Will to Power, suggests a political outlook that values exceptional individuals and radical cultural reforms over universal rights and equality. Though less prescriptive about specific institutions, Nietzsche’s ideas inspire a vision where politics serves as a platform for the emergence of extraordinary individuals who challenge and redefine moral and cultural standards.

In essence, Mill’s politics aims at a harmonious society through rational consensus, while Nietzsche envisages a transformative, often conflict-laden process driven by extraordinary individuals and their creative will.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Mill and Nietzsche present contrasting visions of human agency that reflect their foundational philosophical commitments. Mill’s rationalism and faith in objective truth shape his liberal political philosophy, emphasizing individual liberty and social progress. Nietzsche’s departure from traditional notions of truth and morality underscores a philosophy of self-overcoming and cultural renewal, promoting a more individual-centric and sometimes provocative political outlook. Understanding these differing perspectives enhances our appreciation of the complex relationship between human nature and politics in philosophical thought.

References

• Mill, J. S. (1859). On Liberty.
• Nietzsche, F. (1883). Also sprach Zarathustra.
• Nietzsche, F. (1886). Beyond Good and Evil.
• Nietzsche, F. (1886). Genealogy of Morality.
• Eastin, M., Cicchirillo, V., & Mabry, A. (2015). Extending the digital divide conversation: Examining the knowledge gap through media expectancies. Journal Of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 59(3).
• Begany, G. (2014). Addressing eHealth Literacy and the Digital Divide: Access, Affordability and Awareness. Bulletin of the Association for Information Science & Technology, 41(1): 29-32.
• Buchi, M., Just, N., & Latzer, M. (2016). Modeling the second-level digital divide: A five-country study of social differences in internet use. New Media & Society.
• DiMaggio, J. (2001). The digital divide.
• Van Volkom, M., Stapley, J., & Amaturo, V. (2014). Revisiting the Digital Divide: Generational Differences in Technology Use in Everyday Life. North American Journal of Psychology.
• Dictionary.com (2017). Digital Divide.