Reply to comment

There were many things about this reading that I found interesting however, it wasn't really groundbreaking in its analysis.

I mean, humans have been utilitarians since the very begining. There is no doubt that the will of the individual is sacrificed for the will of the group.

Now whether this is good or bad- I couldn't say.

What is interesting is how this reading highlighted a psychological...quandry.

A great deal of my very interesting intro psych class deals with diagnosis of illness- what is abnormal or wrong. Being a true child of the 'political correctness' era I squirm at these classifications. So after class one day I approached my professor and asked her whether these definitions were really necessary. She told me that in her personal experience people compared their life with those around them and wanted 'normalcy' which she, in turn, helped them to find. In the end- despite their differences- people willingly succumb to conformity.

Ultimately- the desire to be an individual- is quashed by the will of the group. It is all well and good to complain about society being 'disabling' and that 'the teacher just doesn't understand my childs need to express his emotions' but all the happy-clappy understanding bs has no relevence to the survival of the group.

So if this 'groupthink' mentality ensures the survival of the species- who is really more disabling? Society or the individual?