Sign In
Not register? Register Now!
You are here: HomeCase StudyPsychology
Pages:
5 pages/≈1375 words
Sources:
4 Sources
Level:
MLA
Subject:
Psychology
Type:
Case Study
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 21.6
Topic:

Hypothetical Questions (Case Study Sample)

Instructions:

Question One
In The Communist Manfesto, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels argue that society human history is characterized by class struggle between the haves and the have-nots/the poor. This argument captures the relationship between the rich (owners of the means of production) and the poor (workers), whereby the former strives to control and dominate the latter. For instance, employers seek to control workers by paying them minimum wages, just enough for sustenance. Thus, the rich ensures that the poor have just enough to enable them survive and continue working, but never sufficient to enable them accumulate wealth. However, Marx and Engels predict a future when the workers will rebel and create a socialist economy, where wealth will belong to all people, thus marking the end to the capitalist economy.

source..
Content:

Question One
In The Communist Manfesto, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels argue that society human history is characterized by class struggle between the haves and the have-nots/the poor. This argument captures the relationship between the rich (owners of the means of production) and the poor (workers), whereby the former strives to control and dominate the latter. For instance, employers seek to control workers by paying them minimum wages, just enough for sustenance. Thus, the rich ensures that the poor have just enough to enable them survive and continue working, but never sufficient to enable them accumulate wealth. However, Marx and Engels predict a future when the workers will rebel and create a socialist economy, where wealth will belong to all people, thus marking the end to the capitalist economy.
The Communist Manifesto echoes Anna Arendt’s sentiments in The Vita Activa and the Modern Age, which views history through the lens of contention between different classes. Specifically, Arendt documents the contention between various institutions in history, for example between the church/the clergy and science, between the monarchy and the common citizenry, and between religion and secularism (Marx and Engels 15). The conflicts between these groups mirror the conflict between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat in The Communist Manifesto. In this regard, it is arguable that Marx and Engels on the one hand and Anna Arendt on the other agree that human history is the history of class struggles in different forms.
Anna Arendt begins her essay by highlighting the contention for religious knowledge between the church and the citizens. She states that the Reformation movement “expropriated ecclesiastical and monastic possessions, “and led to “the two-fold process of individual expropriation and the accumulation of social wealth” (p. 248). This statement captures the impact of the Reformation on people’s relationship with the church, especially regarding the church’s control on believers’ relationship with God. Before the reformation, the Church enjoyed monopoly over religious matters, for example, by determining how believers sought and received forgiveness. For instance, believers had to confess to a priest to be forgiven, while those who opposed church dogma were labeled heretics and condemned to hell. However, the reformation challenged the Church’s monopoly over people’s faith and salvation, leading to the creation of new church denominations and the redefinition of salvation; people could pray directly to God and ask for forgiveness instead of relying on the Church.
The impact of the Reformation is similar to the impact of the class struggle that Marx and Engels envisioned in The Communist Manifesto. In both cases, there is a struggle between the ruling elite and the masses, with the latter emerging victorious. Under the Reformation, the masses rebelled against the Church’s control over the people’s faith and salvation (Arendt 249). In the class struggle between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat, the masses (working class) 


Question Two
Eranst Kapp’s philosophical depiction of the locomotive and the electromagnetic telegraph differs from Martin Heidegger’s depiction of the hydroelectric plant built into the Rhine, suggesting a different understanding of technology. While both authors view technology as a means to aid and enhance human productivity, they differ on their understanding of the essence of technology.
In Elements of a Philosophy of Technology, Kapp et al. use the image of the locomotive to liken technology to a living organism. The authors argue that any technological object has parts that perform different roles; otherwise the object would not function properly (Kapp et al. 98). For instance, a locomotive has an engine which powers it and wheels that enable it to move. The authors liken these parts of a locomotive to the components of a human body to suggest that a locomotive is similar to a living organism. For instance, the locomotive needs energy to move the same way a human body requires

...
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now:

Other Topics:

    Need a Custom Essay Written?
    First time 15% Discount!