<p>
[quote]
PR 2012 Practice Test 1
Assignment: Are we free to make our own choice in life, or are our decisions always limited by the rules of society?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Rules are rules for the sole purpose of project every single being in society. However, as Maria Montessori discovered, if people are all nurtured through individual methods, usually the best results will be establish into what they generally believe. Thus, it is quite lucid that decisions are ours to make, unbounded by the morals of society. It is society's inevitable response to this stimulus that will always result in consequence. This inevitable, incontrovertible truth may be examined through the philosophical viewpoints of Arthur Schopenhauer, the humanistic viewpoints of Fredrich Nietzsche, and transcendentalist viewpoints of Henry David Thoreau.</p>
<p>Arthur Schopenhauer, a nineteenth century German philosopher, focused on the motif of will and desire of people versus society. Schopenhauer exemplifies this key cognitive though in his book The World as Will and Presentation, fourth manuscript: "Ontology". He states that human and societal interests are at consistent conflagrable conflict in which both sides react to each other. Schopenhauer states that if people extend their desires, then society will react with a parallel and congruent consequence. If society pushes into people's ways too much, they will be lead further by a practice of human free will. Thus, Schopenhauer exemplifies how people have their endless bounds, but society may react with congruences. This idea is the illuminated further by Nietzsche.</p>
<p>Fredrich Nietzsche, a humanist, focused his ideas on those known as creative lifestyle. Rather than just the anomaly of "birth-growth-death," Nietzsche postulated that people try to develop everything in their lives according to their needs. Society then reacts because of a much more momentous and magnified scale, these needs constantly diverge and cause outrage and quite a conflagration. Thus, Nietzsche clearly exemplifies how humanistic outlooks may seem favorable and are without a doubt possible, but are abridged to the full picture of society. Thoreau, on the other hand, varies slightly in his beliefs.</p>
<p>Nineteenth century American Transcendentalist Henry David Thoreau believed that people should and have their best interest to be self-willed and have self-efficacy. Thoreau explains how the government controls people like "mindless machines" to the extend where one must pay taxes for schools, wars, etc. that one does not support. It is clear that Thoreau exemplifies that humans should be those who listen to themselves in his work known as "Civil Disobedience", but the consequences are close to the fact that very few act in self-interest. Thus, people are not fully supported and cannot carry out accordingly.</p>
<p>Throughout all of time, all ideas, all cultures, it is our ideas, our choices, our efficacies which propel limitless, unbounded actions. Every action has a consequence and all think of it differently. Whether it's a battle between society and people as Schopenhauer put it, the no representation as Nietzsche postulated, or incompleteness as Thoreau put it, people will have consequences.</p>
<p>
A few notes about this. I read the intro paragraph part stupidly so some of this might be irrelevant (but I don't think it's that off). Also, the handwriting looks a lot worse :P. This is before I started reading guides on short intros, etc. Nonetheless, all feedback is welcome!
</p>