By: Hoshyar W

   Sept 27, 2005

       Many scholars--sociologists, historians.--like to classify societies, beliefs, and policies as belonging to or tending toward one separate category. Individualism is supposedly all about allowing individual freedoms. I believe this to be an illusory state, with grave implications for how it affects people's actions due to the false assumptions that it gives people, because my view does not fit in either category.

 Unfortunately, in our world the technology destroys human’s life; it is a strict for the world. This system in the world restrains the rights of every individual. I believe it is no word to qualify every tragedy, and torture in our world. Why it is no one to resuscitate every one, and stand up together, and say we need a medicine to remedy our lives, and save us from torture, killing, squashing our brain every second. The destiny of every one is gone, suddenly we still running after it, but it is no one can attain their lives, and bring our human style back. Intently, my point about human right in our world assert, and I believe it is time for every one to fight for their rights, no matter how long it takes every thing will be change. I think the only one can change our system is you and your friends, no one can choose a good right and freedom for you, and us, but destroying human right and take away freedom from individual in a world is a great example of the fallacy of dualism. The world system never regards, and never asserts the human rights in our world. It also squashes every individual’s brain, that’s why the human’s right and freedom in a world day by day face to death and ending.

       I believe in the existence of intrinsic rights of individual, and the intrinsic value of the happiness of the individual. I contend that the idea of the value and rights of many are absurd with out the idea of the value, and rights of the individual. However, with rights it come great responsibility; this system does not give any individual the right to do whatever we wants without regard to others. On the contrary, the rights of other individuals are the justifications for the restrictions on people’s actions. No one should be allowed to step on or” withhold” the rights of another. Infect, infringes people’s basic rights in many ways and plays in to the illusion of true unmitigated freedom.

    So, I believe the remedy is to restrict the actions, not the rights of people so that the rights of others maybe protected. Obviously, the actions that are to be restricted are not rights, for the idea of rights would be a self-contradictory idea if someone has the “right” to infringe upon the rights of another.

     This viewpoint of mine does not squash the rights of the individual for a society, nor does not squash a person to do what ever he wants by the name of “freedom”, but it asserts to equal rights of all individuals, and restrains individual according to how their action infringe upon the rights of others, and uses quantity of individual as one consideration.