MY IDEAL SOCIETY Free will is a property of human nature that depends solely on the individual. Every individual in a free society has the ability to make any decision that impacts his or her own life. This means that any one person can use their own free will to alter or hamper the ideals possessed by another individual within the society. This notion goes against the grains of the idea of an ideal society. An ideal society would have to provide the ideal conditions for all those who lived within it. The principles and standards of the inhabitants within the society would determine these ideal conditions. If an individual within this model society could alter the life of another individual within the society, the ideals of the second individual may be broken; this consequently undermines and destroys the concept of an absolute ideal society. Thomas More’s Utopia carries the premise that everyone within the utopian society does what is necessary for the good of the society, and that one’s free will would consist of only what is beneficial to the culture. This, in itself, is limiting free will by excluding the possibility of freely doing what is not beneficial to the culture. More said, the citizens, “(do) not waste their time in idleness or self-indulgence,” but who’s to say that they cannot? Absolute free will gives each citizen the ability to do whatever they feel inclined to do, even perhaps, idle or self-indulge. In Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech, the idea of free will throughout the society is not touched on; however, on the basis that freedom should be given to citizens of “color,” freedom of will would most likely be included. I believe that humans can live peacefully together if everyone would be cooperative and conscientious to each other. My ideal view for humanity is one that will probably never be attained, but still one to hope for in my opinion. I feel that if humans lived more robotically, continually striving to contribute to society with the skills and talents that they are best with, whether it be an advanced understanding of mathematics, advanced artistic ability, or advanced athleticism. Each person doing what they do best to improve technology, contribute to the world’s knowledge base, create entertainment, or do whatever their skills allow them to do in the way of improving humanity, and in turn their lives and everyone else’s life. With such a large population, and a reproduction rate that exponentially grows the population until equilibrium is found between population and available resources, the number of biologically different individuals would allow for many types of specialization, filling the roles of society that have been established and allowing growth and development of new roles to be filled by next generations, if not members of the existing generation. Government is another social issue that is in conflict with the idea of an ideal society. The implementation of any form of government into a society will undoubtedly create problems. Absolute approval of one form of government throughout a large and diverse society is virtually impossible. Therefore, if so much as one societal member’s governmental ideals are not met, then the system fails to produce an absolute ideal society. In More’s Utopia, there is no established system of government. Instead, the citizens of the utopia share similar beliefs of logic and good willingness towards man. No intricate form of government is needed because the citizens regulate and punish themselves on the basis of individual circumstances. More wrote that, “laws have been properly make by a wise ruler, or passed by common consent of a whole population.” This idea, which seems unflawed, is unrealistic in today’s terms and would become unfeasible with a largely populated society. In comparison, Dr. King’s speech is held in the context of the American government, which since its origin has already crushed the ideals of many Americans. Controversial laws and standards within America, such as abortion and corporal punishment, do not meet the values and ideals of all American citizens. Ultimately the relationship between any form of government and an ideal society creates contradicting viewpoints and does not allow the two to exist together.
Also with a system like this, there would be no need for money. Everything would be free, because production would be continuous. Everyone would be fed because, in this conscientious society, nobody would take more food than they needed, or more of anything than they needed. Food could be free because farmers produce the food for everyone, while the road workers fix the roads for everyone, and the scientists advance technology for everyone. Everyone benefits from each other, so everything is shared: free medical care, free food, free tickets to the concert until all of the seats are gone. Without money, and with this overarching conscientiousness, greed would finally no longer be a flaw of humans. It would be understood between all members of this society that you only take what you need, and provide for everyone.
Finally, the concept of human equality would deteriorate the idea of an ideal society. A speech that was written primarily for the benefit of racial equality. Dr. King speaks about a society where all men are treated as equals and where, “ little black boys and black girls will be able to join hands with little white boys and white girls as sisters and brothers.” This, in most opinions, is an important ideal and should never be contested. Unfortunately, not all members of a society may feel this way, and therefore their own ideals would not be satisfied. Although the premise of racial equality should exist, and does so today in some of the place in the world, in some instances it is not believed in and so cannot be retained as an ideal constant. In More’s Utopia, the idea of equality deals not with race, but with concept of social classification. In More’s utopia there is no difference in social class. All members of the utopian society exist as financial equals and do not place a monetary value on earthly possessions. More’s and King’s ideas of social equality may actually be linked, in the sense that the concept of equality is necessary for achieving an idealistic society. Although both thoughts bring up strong points and should be used while attempting to create an ideal society, neither can provide absolute ideal conditions of everyone within a society. This reliance on conscientiousness speaks to the personalities that the humans living in this society would need to have. The people living this type of lifestyle would have to be honest, respectful, and selfless. There would be no place for arrogance, selfishness, desire for power or control, or feelings of superiority. Every person would have to believe they were equal to each other, and live for each other rather than for themselves. Hospitality and politeness would be deeply cherished traditions, where a host would be willing and insistent to sacrifice some comfort in order to help a stranger in the same way they might help a friend.I realize that this is a very farfetched and incredibly unlikely society, but I feel that if conditions were perfect, it is a society that would work. It’s a lot to ask for, that humans eliminate greed and selfishness, but if this could be done, I think that society would be much closer to reaching perfection.