Calvert Hall College High School
Baltimore, Maryland
Teacher: George Kropp
The Meaning of the American Individual
Dathan Scott
11th Grade
As American people, we are all separate from other people throughout the world because of our culture and society. We also are all separate individuals within this culture and society who enrich the essence and meaning of it through our different skills, talents, and gifts we have obtained. We each have a personal responsibility to accept the freedom and liberty that we have and use it to not only better ourselves but to also better the community. Our personal responsibility not only as a person affects both our liberty and the whole community, better known as the common good. Being able to integrate both, liberty and the common good of the community, into society is the definition of the personal responsibility held by each and every one of us as American citizens.
Personal responsibility is displayed at different circumstances, when the person recognizes how to manage it, then it balances individual liberty and the common good. For example, a young teenager tries to decide whether or not to drink alcohol at a party. One way this could affect personal liberty is if this teenager is a driver. What if he or she does drink, and then drive? An accident occurs, and in the process they end up crashing into another car head on killing the driver of the other car. They have just robbed that person of the right to live and to freedom. Same as in the instance Kelly Lanier used when talking about the removing of liberty, when the “a person who has the right to bear arms, uses that arm or weapon to shoot another person, taking away there right and freedom of living.” By exhibiting good morals and responsibility the teenager could avoid killing someone or even being involved in the accident by not drinking at all. Personal responsibility has effects on the common good, in such examples like the Ban on Public Smoking or Smoking in Public Places. Like Aaron Traffas believed, “the smokers need to have the personal responsibility of knowing where to smoke so that they won’t affect the other people’s lives around them.” This contributes to the common good of the whole community obviously because it cuts down on dire and unhealthy conditions like second hand smoke and lung cancer as a result thereof on the nonsmoker.
Personal responsibility is or could be considered the “glue” that brings together and balances the ideas of individual liberty and the common good. In reality personal responsibility in itself affects both individual liberty and the common good of the whole community in every situation where a person’s personal responsibility is tested. Within American society, the personal responsibility of each individual is valued much more because of the society and economy in which we live. For example, manufacturers and suppliers use simple surveys and questionnaires that require the opinion and reply of the selected individual so that they know which type of product to produce and sell. A very important personal citizen responsibility would be for the American individual to exercise their right to vote. This is an individual liberty that also affects the common good of the whole community because each and every vote counts when it comes down to the election results. This topic leads us into the troubled areas when the role of personal responsibility favors either the individual liberty over the common good, and vice versa. One repeated argument that agrees with this kind of topic is the right of the individual, or companies, to be able to clear parts and pieces of land used for animal preservation and wildlife, to construct new houses and buildings. This is not good for the common good of the community because it destroys the environment that was once there, depleting the economy and the environment as a whole of its natural resources.
Personal responsibility has to be greater than both the individual liberty and the common good combined. Doing or having it greater than the two put together influences the situation and actions of the individual. This is true to the fact that if the personal responsibility of the individual is equal to or less than the individual liberty or the common good, their judgment and thoughtfulness would become easily distorted, persuaded or wrongly influenced. If their personal responsibility is lower than their individual liberty, the chances of the person abusing their liberties is higher, due to the fact that they do not have the maturity or the understanding to use their liberty properly. If their responsibility is lower than the pressure from the community, the person could become one that works to serve everyone else before themselves, which would also affect their opinion and cause them to become more dependent and reliant on the community because of the communities unclear thought of the common good for them at the expense of manipulating this individual’s right to thought and freedom.
Answers to Questions Regarding the Required Reading
Q1-What do youthink Justin Reiter meant by including the following in his essay?
“…if the people are not accustomed to the freedom they will be angered by the inequality.” Were you angered by some of the things Justin said in his essay? Did you agree or disagree?
By including the following in his essay, Justin Reiter was explaining that anyone not successful or happy with his living conditions within the American society is angered at the fact that there are others “on top of them,” living a happy and beneficial life that they have always wanted to have for themselves. Overall it was a very accurate essay written in terms of the equality of Americans or lack there of. However Reiter was wrong when he said in fact that “Everyone has an equal right to be poor or to have loads of money; everyone also has the right to live in a house or a box,” because he forgot to include that there are outside factors that interfere with a person’s right to be poor or to have loads of money. A person that is more qualified for a job than another might not get that job over that person because the employer has a bias that favors a certain sex, race, or background.
Q2- Explain: “He felt that the common good could be served by each individual pursuing self-interest.” To whom did Chris Carney attribute these feelings?
First of all, Chris Carney was attributing these feelings to the Founder of the U.S. Constitution, James Madison. What is meant by this quote is Carney believes Madison felt that by everyone bettering themselves independently, it would benefit the whole community because they would be able to use their skills and talents to affect the economy and others around them. This effectively contradicts Carney’s beliefs because he said it was better to “sacrifice a 25 point individual basketball game, in order for the team to win.” This goes against Madison’s understanding since; the individual is not pursuing self interest to benefit the whole.
Q3- In the next to the last paragraph in her essay, Faith Doyle discuses Emperor Diocletian and his Edict of 301. Relate that to the essay topic.
As Faith Doyle had discussed in her essay, Emperor Diocletian and his Edict of 301, attempted to create an equal society by controlling every aspect of human life, taking away the individual’s reason and right to live. This is related to the current essay topic because the responsibility of each person to work and produce for his or herself was null and void. Their individual liberty and responsibility was solely controlled by the government, therefore not allowing each individual to contribute to and benefit from the community.
Q4- Kelly Lanier says in her essay: “Even though everyone is born with the same rights here in America; sometimes a person can step on or take away the rights of another person.” Relate the example she gives and give us another one of your own.
The example that Kelly Lanier uses in her essay effectively explains the contents of the quote because it describes a way a person can limit and take way the rights of another. By saying that “a person has the right to bear arms, but if they shoot that person, they are taking away that person’s right,” Lanier emphasizes the importance of personal responsibility to use and interpret the law correctly, so that a person does not intrude upon the rights on another. This idea can also be seen, since we as a people have the right of freedom of the press. However members of the press abuse this right, by taking away the right of privacy from others. For example, paparazzi basically stalk and record celebrities, like Britney Spears, every move, intruding upon their privacy.
Q5- Explain what Joshua Spencer means when he says that “individual liberty is a fragile, yet powerful, asset.” How does he relate individual liberty to dictators? Do you agree with his assessment? Why or why not? Be specific.
Joshua Spencer describes the idea that individual liberty could be easily broken and taken away, but individual liberty itself is powerful because then each person has the power to explore self interests and personal responsibility. What Spencer explains is that the dictator works to take away the individual liberty of the individual, making each dependent upon him. His statements of dictatorship are comparative to that of Faith Doyle’s statements about Diocletian and his government because both took away the liberty and freedom of the individual, and made them dependent on the government or dictator. My thoughts about his assessment are that his arguments are substantial and reliable because he is right when explaining how a dictator exerts his power and influence to drain the freedom and power of the masses. The aim of the dictator is to present himself as the superior being over the people, he wants them to look up to him and depend on him as a leader and provider.
Q6-Luck Hall asked “Will we maintain our freedom or destroy it to be safe?” How would you answer that question?
I would answer that by saying that for myself I would maintain my freedom regardless of the circumstance because as an individual I have the God-given natural right of free-will and choice. No one or no thing should be able to deny me of this right and my freedom. By denying someone’s freedom, the perpetrator is dehumanizing that person, making their life a living misery, not the joy and freedom as life should be. While even facing hardship and torture, I would maintain my freedom; my freedom is what makes me a human being in this world.
Q7- Some people, according to which student essayist in 1999, suggested that “the Constitution's framers might have 'put greater emphasis on the protection of the community over individual liberty', had they seen the world today.”? She doesn’t agree. Do You?
According to Molly McGlone, she disagreed with the fact that “the Constitution's framers might have 'put greater emphasis on the protection of the community over individual liberty', had they seen the world today.” I agree with McGlone for the reason that the structure of the Constitution is so that the people have the ability to change laws that are deemed unnecessary due to a change in policies and time. For example all the laws regarding the ownership and treatment of slaves have been nullified because slavery was abolished officially by the 13th Amendment.
Q8- “Just because a law may achieve desirable results, it should not take precedence over the Constitution.” Do you agree or disagree? Aaron Traffas, discusses the Ban on Smoking in Public Places and the Gun Free School Zones Act. How do you personally feel about these two issues?
Yes, I do believe that Aaron Traffas is right when he included this statement in his essay because the logic behind it is that if a law is passed that overrides the law of the Constitution without it being amended; the Constitution then becomes invalid and just a worthless document. Passing these kinds of laws, even if better for the community, would devalue and degrade the value and worth of the Constitution. Now dealing with the two issues, my opinion about the Gun Free School Zones Act is that it would make sense because it would further protect the environment around the schools. I am in favor of this law because it is better for the common good of the community; however it would take away freedom from the individual. The same goes for the Ban on Public Smoking, even though it makes sense to pass this law, it would limit and take away the freedom of the individual, which is in fact taking away the identity of the individual as an American.
Q9- Annie St. Romain referred to a book in her essay where “the government regulated every possible aspect of human life from profession to family to emotions.” What was the name of that book? Have you read it?
The name of the book referenced by Anne St. Romain is titled The Giver, which indeed tells the story about what life would be like if the government controlled every aspect of human society. I have read this book by Lois Lowry, and it was a good book because it examined the value and strength of the human person. For example there was the government that “released” the defected or “useless” people, and then there was the main character that acted to protect the value of human life by saving the other twin. The people living in the society believed in everything the government commissioned, and were oblivious to
evils that were happening that the government did.
Q10- “As nations grow in size and social complexity, governments claim greater powers to restrain individuals and groups. Those who criticize this development believe that it has gone so far as to threaten the existence of individual liberty. Others believe that only if government is granted such powers, can complex problems be solved.” This quote can be found in Jessie Veit’s essay. Which side of the issue do you support and why?
I support the first statement that the “development has gone so far as to threaten the existence of individual liberty” because the people began to rely too much on the legal system and government to handle their problems or misfortunes for them. As located in Veit’s essay, “people are not willing to accept responsibility; they would rather get an attorney to get money for medical expenses from the property owner.” This weakens the right of individual liberty because the people began to expect the government to solve all of their problems for them minor and major, instead of just taking it upon themselves first to try and better the situation and solve the conflict. Even as society and the population grow, the individual still has to maintain personal responsibility because the voice of the individual can be faint when society and population grow. The individual is the core of the power in the American system and when each person begins to give up their power and depend on the government too much to solve their problems, then that’s when the society would become unhealthy because the government would assume too much power.
Q11- Give three examples where personal responsibility would replace the need for laws. Do not duplicate those found in Patrick Karcher’s essay.
Personal responsibility would replace the need for laws in a number a specific cases. Two would be traffic laws, like speeding and jaywalking. If the driver would take the responsibility to protect themselves and others around them, there would be no need for speed limit laws or tickets. The same thing could be said for jaywalking, if the pedestrian would take the responsibility and not put themselves into danger and also the driver of cars, then it would be no need for jaywalking laws. A third example would involve the problem of underage drinking. First of all if the minors would realize that what they are doing to their bodies is destructive, and also be responsible enough to know what kind of effects drinking could have on their lives. Then the blame would come down on the parents to uphold their responsibility of teaching their child right from wrong, and keeping a healthy communication interaction between them and their children.
Q12- It is obvious that Benji Lehman is idealistic. In his essay he claims when the Founding Fathers “wrote the Constitution they put a great emphasis on each person having personal rights as well as individual liberties. The true strength of each and every community falls on the individual. Believing each man, woman, and child will, and can recognize the importance of good responsibility.…These were laws that gave each and everyone of us the opportunity and self-respect to do the right thing.” Benji believed that people would make choices that would serve and benefit their communities. Do you believe that? Please explain.
I believe that people do make these choices that would benefit and serve their communities. If people did not make these decisions, we would not have the United States of America. If the colonies had not joined together to oppose the British, we could still be a British province today. If the North and South had not bonded together and not fought against each other, we would still have a divided nation today, with slavery still existing. If the people had not come together after the attack on Pearl Harbor, we would have lost WWII, and would not have the United Nations. If Martin Luther King Jr. had never voiced his opinions, equality among all people today would still be far-fetched. So the voice and responsibility of the individual is what empowers the community as a whole.