Dystopia In Brave New World
Utopia and Dysotopia in Science Fiction What would it be like to live in an Utopian city? Is it really all it claims to be? There are many philosophers who have discussed the idea of Utopias and Dystopias. Some are for it and some aren 't. Some believe it 's possible to have a Utopia while others believe there is no way that it can. Plato, More, Hobbes, and Locke are some that have a high idea of Utopias. A Brave New World, indirectly supported and refuted some of the ideas of these philosophers in different ways. A philosopher that can support Brave New World is Plato. Plato was against families, and he thought no child should know their parents. This was a very obvious in the book. In the story, natural reproduction was not used to make
…show more content…
new babies. Children were now created and raised in Hatcheries and Conditioning Centres. This allowed children to not even have parents at all so it supported the thought of Plato where no child knew their parents. In the book, everyone is given the job title and role in society by their DNA. Plato feels that every person in society should fulfill their specific role as well. An example of this in Brave New World would be how children in Conditioning Centres were brought up. They each had a certain castes which determined positions with the social and economic part of their world. Everyone was given a certain postion or role they had to fulfill. In this case they were seperated into Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Epsilons. They are all conditioned to know their role in society and to do it to the best of their ability. This made certain everyone did their role, leave no room for slackers or lack of certain positions being done. John Locke is also a philosopher that can support Brave New World. Locke thinks that humans are naturally rational and know right and wrong. He believes they are capable to govern themselves. In the story, it is very obvious that although they may have leaders over them, they pretty much govern and take care of themselves. This also supported Locke 's idea of Democracy. The society was maintained by the people who had strict control of it. Although they had a government over them, they seemed to govern themselves more with their beliefs. Locke believed all was born with certain rights like property, life and liberty. In the book, everything was given to them in porportion to their caste which helped keep things in order. They had their different rights depending on their DNA and they were given food, land, etc based on their caste. The different types of emotions that caused people in a normal society to act unlawful was ellimnated by the conditioning systems ensuring that all would stay accordingly and people was kept "happy" and "peaceful". The purpose of the government is to protect people 's liberties and rights. Thomas More is a philosopher whose ideas were refuted by Brave New World.
More was not against family and that was one of the ideas in that was opposite in the book. Family was not encouraged in the story. It was to the point where people didn 't have children. Instead children were made. More, however, believes that parents are ideal in society. Parents didn 't exist in Brave New World. The children were taught the ways of life and conditioned to the way of the society. Culture in the book did not exist. More was for culture. There was no need for culture in the book. Since people in the story were conditioned to do things, they never had to really talk or so. More would have supported books, family, and going into school. There was no need for books and things of that sort in the book. Everything was stable in the story. Everyone went through the same cycle so there was no need for different views or ideas. It was almost like children were brainwashed from a young age to think the same way to avoid conflict. This kept peace in the society, but then once in awhile there is one who end up being different. For example, Bernard and Helmholtz were different for people in their society. This made them an outcast. They are acceptions to the rule, although the ended up getting exiled from the
town. This book, also, refuted the ideas of Thomas Hobbes. It was actually the opposite of his ideas. Hobbes believed that humans by nature did not know right and wrong which is why they need the government. In the book, there was a government but to an extent. It wasn 't a monarchy like how Hobbes thought it should be. The book showed that the people was able to govern themselves and gave them different types of roles. They had a Director who seemed to be in charge but didn 't have king-like attributes. He believes that since human nature is corrupt and needs something over them to keep them in the right. In the story, they didn 't need someone to make sure they did right and keep them from wrong. Hobbes thought that people had to hand over their rights to the monarch so that they can get protection. In the book, everyone had their rights and protection. They did not need to hand over their rights to anyone. He also thought that no matter what, even if unfair, no one could over throw the monarch. If needed be, people could probably revolt against the governement, but since most people were happy with the government, there was no need for it. Brave New World, although a science fiction novel, helps us understand the thoughts and ideas of different philosophers. This story helps us understand Plato and his ideas because of the way each member in the society had their role to fulfill. It showed us how helpful it would be in a society where everyone does their role and how it keeps things balanced. They didn 't have to worry about someone not doing their job, because they all did what they were supposed to do. We can imagine a world without families, the way Plato likes it. A world where we don 't have parents to teach us our way. Instead, we go off of our own intuition since in Locke 's world, we know right from wrong. Hobbes on the other hand, was opposite of Locke and his beliefs. Hobbes didn 't believe that people knew right and wrong. This book served as a strong counterpart to Hobbes, but also showed us reasons why a society different than one of his ideas is wrong to have. Using this story, Hobbes 's point of how families are important and how we as humans need a higher power to help us since we are corrupt. In Brave New World, we can see the bad in not having a proper family, as people indulged themself in Soma for true happiness. Now as for More, he was more of a person that believed in cultural things. For example, he was a firm believer in the idea of an ideal family where parents raised their children up in the right way. Now, in the book, it was opposite and no need for parents or families. This killed the culture in the book. It made everything more of the same than having everyone being different. This book, showed why More 's ideas if family and culture is better than having now the way it was in the book. In conclusion, Brave New World was a perfect story to show the ideas of different philosophers. These philosophers include Hobbes, More, Plato, and Locke. All four had different thoughts that influenced different societies. This book, supported Locke and Plato 's Ideas of their perfect society. It refuted the ideas of Hobbes and More, but at the same time, showed the negatives of Plato 's and Locke 's ideas which could be a support to Hobbes and More. A real Utopian city would probably be one with attributes from all four philosophers, but until all of these can come together, is a utopian city really possible? Even if they come together, will it be possible? Probably not because of the way human nature is.
Works Cited
Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World,. New York: Harper & Bros., 1946. Print
new babies. Children were now created and raised in Hatcheries and Conditioning Centres. This allowed children to not even have parents at all so it supported the thought of Plato where no child knew their parents. In the book, everyone is given the job title and role in society by their DNA. Plato feels that every person in society should fulfill their specific role as well. An example of this in Brave New World would be how children in Conditioning Centres were brought up. They each had a certain castes which determined positions with the social and economic part of their world. Everyone was given a certain postion or role they had to fulfill. In this case they were seperated into Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, and Epsilons. They are all conditioned to know their role in society and to do it to the best of their ability. This made certain everyone did their role, leave no room for slackers or lack of certain positions being done. John Locke is also a philosopher that can support Brave New World. Locke thinks that humans are naturally rational and know right and wrong. He believes they are capable to govern themselves. In the story, it is very obvious that although they may have leaders over them, they pretty much govern and take care of themselves. This also supported Locke 's idea of Democracy. The society was maintained by the people who had strict control of it. Although they had a government over them, they seemed to govern themselves more with their beliefs. Locke believed all was born with certain rights like property, life and liberty. In the book, everything was given to them in porportion to their caste which helped keep things in order. They had their different rights depending on their DNA and they were given food, land, etc based on their caste. The different types of emotions that caused people in a normal society to act unlawful was ellimnated by the conditioning systems ensuring that all would stay accordingly and people was kept "happy" and "peaceful". The purpose of the government is to protect people 's liberties and rights. Thomas More is a philosopher whose ideas were refuted by Brave New World.
More was not against family and that was one of the ideas in that was opposite in the book. Family was not encouraged in the story. It was to the point where people didn 't have children. Instead children were made. More, however, believes that parents are ideal in society. Parents didn 't exist in Brave New World. The children were taught the ways of life and conditioned to the way of the society. Culture in the book did not exist. More was for culture. There was no need for culture in the book. Since people in the story were conditioned to do things, they never had to really talk or so. More would have supported books, family, and going into school. There was no need for books and things of that sort in the book. Everything was stable in the story. Everyone went through the same cycle so there was no need for different views or ideas. It was almost like children were brainwashed from a young age to think the same way to avoid conflict. This kept peace in the society, but then once in awhile there is one who end up being different. For example, Bernard and Helmholtz were different for people in their society. This made them an outcast. They are acceptions to the rule, although the ended up getting exiled from the
town. This book, also, refuted the ideas of Thomas Hobbes. It was actually the opposite of his ideas. Hobbes believed that humans by nature did not know right and wrong which is why they need the government. In the book, there was a government but to an extent. It wasn 't a monarchy like how Hobbes thought it should be. The book showed that the people was able to govern themselves and gave them different types of roles. They had a Director who seemed to be in charge but didn 't have king-like attributes. He believes that since human nature is corrupt and needs something over them to keep them in the right. In the story, they didn 't need someone to make sure they did right and keep them from wrong. Hobbes thought that people had to hand over their rights to the monarch so that they can get protection. In the book, everyone had their rights and protection. They did not need to hand over their rights to anyone. He also thought that no matter what, even if unfair, no one could over throw the monarch. If needed be, people could probably revolt against the governement, but since most people were happy with the government, there was no need for it. Brave New World, although a science fiction novel, helps us understand the thoughts and ideas of different philosophers. This story helps us understand Plato and his ideas because of the way each member in the society had their role to fulfill. It showed us how helpful it would be in a society where everyone does their role and how it keeps things balanced. They didn 't have to worry about someone not doing their job, because they all did what they were supposed to do. We can imagine a world without families, the way Plato likes it. A world where we don 't have parents to teach us our way. Instead, we go off of our own intuition since in Locke 's world, we know right from wrong. Hobbes on the other hand, was opposite of Locke and his beliefs. Hobbes didn 't believe that people knew right and wrong. This book served as a strong counterpart to Hobbes, but also showed us reasons why a society different than one of his ideas is wrong to have. Using this story, Hobbes 's point of how families are important and how we as humans need a higher power to help us since we are corrupt. In Brave New World, we can see the bad in not having a proper family, as people indulged themself in Soma for true happiness. Now as for More, he was more of a person that believed in cultural things. For example, he was a firm believer in the idea of an ideal family where parents raised their children up in the right way. Now, in the book, it was opposite and no need for parents or families. This killed the culture in the book. It made everything more of the same than having everyone being different. This book, showed why More 's ideas if family and culture is better than having now the way it was in the book. In conclusion, Brave New World was a perfect story to show the ideas of different philosophers. These philosophers include Hobbes, More, Plato, and Locke. All four had different thoughts that influenced different societies. This book, supported Locke and Plato 's Ideas of their perfect society. It refuted the ideas of Hobbes and More, but at the same time, showed the negatives of Plato 's and Locke 's ideas which could be a support to Hobbes and More. A real Utopian city would probably be one with attributes from all four philosophers, but until all of these can come together, is a utopian city really possible? Even if they come together, will it be possible? Probably not because of the way human nature is.
Works Cited
Huxley, Aldous. Brave New World,. New York: Harper & Bros., 1946. Print