W12. What is quality for our societies?

 I think human rights, equality and happiness are the most important indicators of the quality of our society. This is because I think these indicators are the most basic but difficult items to secure high scores. What should we do to score high on these indicators?

 

First, let me talk about 'human rights'. Human rights mean the basic rights that a person deserves. Human basic rights include the right to life, liberty, equality, and the right to live. In other words, everyone should be guaranteed the right to be respected the value of life, the right to act freely without interference from anyone else, the right to be treated the same regardless of their political views or status, and their right to enjoy food, clothing, and shelter at least. A steady issue in human rights is the 'human rights of criminals'. It is an argument about whether to protect the human rights of criminals who violate the human rights of others. Unfortunately, criminals are also human beings, so we will have to protect minimum human rights of criminals. I think we should focus more on the fact that the human rights of victims are not guaranteed.

 

The next is ‘equality’. It is one of the basic human rights mentioned earlier. All people are equal regardless of their political views, race, sexual orientation, age, religion, country and region of origin, social status, disability. It's a matter of course, but it's an easy infringing part of everyday life. It is not inequality to treat people with different conditions. It is relative equality to treat the same thing as the same thing and the other differently so that fair share goes to everyone. If there is a reasonable reason, it is to acknowledge discrimination. However, it is inequality to treat others unreasonably without a reasonable reason. You have to keep this in mind.

 

Finally, it is 'happiness'. Among the indicators previously stated as important, the happiness index is what I think is the most important in assessing the quality of society. The two indicators mentioned earlier can be defined objectively. However, it requires an objective criterion that can be assessed because happiness is an extremely subjective indicator. We investigate life satisfaction based on six categories: income levels, health life expectancy, welfare, freedom of choice, awareness of corruption, and society's tolerance. However, Here I have a question, 'If income levels are high, would you be happy?’ Is it possible to express happiness with objective figures?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

W7: GFC book notes By 'William S. Kowinski' , 'Cory Doctorow','Piotr Konieczny' and 'Paul Youngquist'/ 진신

Summary- William S. Kowinski: The true exception is the innovative success of a collaborative effort that has prime online reference work called Wikipedia. This book is not meant to be biography or reportage, but contemporary ethnography or study of a culture. What this book does well is describe how Wikipedia works and what issues have arisen.  It's short on drama and personality，and so it's probably destined to be a source document. Since that seems unlikely, this may remain the best opportunity for learning about this remarkable project. Summary- Cory Doctorow: Reagle makes an excellent case that this assumption of good faith is particularly powerful when it comes to dealing with those who lack good faith — it creates positive outcomes for arguments with everyone from neo-Nazis to political hacks who're whitewashing their boss's entries. Wikipedia's most fascinating and unprecedented aspect isn't the encyclopedia itself — rather, it's the collaborative cu...
Read more

w9: Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? LiuXinlei

 Its often said by teachers that “Wikipedia is a good place to start, but a bad place to finish” why? In terms of the comprehensiveness of the content, we have to admit the advantages of Wikipedia. For example, Wikipedia is undoubtedly my first choice when I don't understand an event at all. It is convenient, fast and comprehensive, and I can spend the least time to understand the whole content of this fact as comprehensively and neutrally as possible. But in the process of in-depth learning, Wikipedia can only be used as an introductory content, because in learning we need to understand this fact as much as possible, and we need to understand the different views of scholars in different regions on the same event. There will be different theories. Some theories seem to be not neutral or even discriminatory or ethnographic at present (such as Marxism and Marxism in China), and it is not suitable for Wikipedia. Be shown. In short, Wikipedia has a very low threshold for users. It assu...
Read more

W10 : Can we think of some example of how Internet has changed our culture? / 박소민(SOMIN PARK)

 1. Summary  The Internet has changed our culture so much. First, through the Internet, we can meet people regardless of distance. People in each country communicated over the Internet and reduced the barriers to distance by creating relationships. Also, the Internet has let us stay away from books. When we want to find expertise, we can get it from Wikipedia or Google. Even information in books can be obtained through e-books, reducing access to libraries and paper books. 2. Interesting point Further to the above, our brains are gradually degenerating because we don't have to remember information. We are constantly interrupted by SNS notifications ringing on our phones when we do something, so our concentration and attention are being reduced. Furthermore, the ease of obtaining information online is causing our short-term memory to decline. 3. Discussion point I think the Internet has made it easy to sever a relationship with a person because we can meet another person simply...
Read more