Philosophy

Karl Marx was a German political economist and a theorist who was more concerned with the economic issues on production. Being the most controversial figure in 19th century, Karl Marx advocated for communal mode of production and opposed the capitalism that was being embraced by the Western powers. He was a radical person with hard stand on his principles. On the other side, Adam Smith was recognized as the best economist in the world and most scholars refers to him as the father of economics.

He explained the market forces and the role of the State in determining the how people should live and set morals that can promote economic growth. Despite the fact that the two scholars were more interested in the economic principles of production, there were marginal difference on their economic opinions and explanations regarding the economic growth of the State and the living standards of the citizens.

It has been controversial to most scholars to analyze the two schools of thought in relation to their economic principles and to determine the most effective model of economic growth. There has been two competing school of thoughts, the most controversial one is the classical economics school that is based on the principles of Adam Smith. However some people believed that Marx belonged to the same school of thought with Smith. Marx was more interested on the disadvantages of capitalism as a mode of production and the advantages of communal mode of production. It can therefore be said that Adam Smith was more concerned with the capitalism as a mode of production. Even though there are similarities between the two schools of thought, as pointed out by Austrian School, there has been a challenge in determining the best mode of production that is efficient.

The classical school of thought became more relevant during the time when the feudal mode of production was overtaken by capitalism. There was a problem in determining the best way the demands of the consumers and producers could be realized without interfering with the economic proponents. The economists had to take key objective of coming up with a proper plan to determine how the peasants and the barons could make a living bearing the fact that feudal mode of production had failed and the majority were relying on the feudal land.

Economists had to ensure that the wages and the prices of the commodities were taken care of since the majority were not used to the capitalist mode of production. In analyzing the two major challenges, the two major schools of thought by Marx and Smith, can help a lot in analyzing the best mode of production. Even though the two theories of production are relevant or necessary for economic growth, I strongly defend the policies from the Adams Smith School of thought as most applicable and practical ideals for production hence relevant for economic growth.

This paper will focus on the variations of principles supported by both philosophers on economic growth of the State in relation to their theories and the difference between the two theories.

Differences between Marx and Smiths thinking on Economic Growth
Karl Marx is believed to be the most controversial political economist born in 1818 in Germany and was the best friend of Friedrich Engel, who was 20 years older than Marx and people acknowledge him as the teacher and the mentor of Karl Marx. His contributions and arguments on the mode of production have made him famous in the world of production and in the school of Economics. He advocated for changes in production level especially for the lower class or the proletariats (Tucker, 1971).

Marxs and Smith arguments on capitalism
On analyzing the principles of capitalism in line with Marxs arguments, Marx believed that capitalism could lead to more problems in the society and could make many people poor and desperate as the means of productions are owned by individuals who are naturally greedy for accumulation of wealth and exploitation of the poor in the society. He further argued that since most of the workers rights are violated by the rich in the society, there was great danger to empower the bourgeoisie in the society since they could easily violate the legal provisions of the poor as Marx believed that the law always favors the rich in the society.

According to Riemer (1987), Smith believed strongly that capitalism was the sure way of serving the interest of the majority since it was characterized with high productivity and high quality. He further argued that production could be increased if the focus is on profit margin in relation to the input cost and argued that communal mode of production was a primitive mode that was characterized with low quality products and high level of risk and a danger to economic growth.

Marxs and Smith on labor
For Marx, labor force is the basis of production in any society. He believed that the wages of the labors are always minimal in capitalist mode of production. He argued that the bourgeoisie are always exploitative and they end up underpaying the workers. However for Smith, capitalism was the best mode of production as he argued that labor can only be important if it can increase the profit of the company to a greater level. He further argued that labor can be sometimes expensive to hire and therefore application of machines can reduce the cost of labor. In there view, labor can be productive or unproductive. Marx argued that labor can add value on the product which can be exchanged for other goods of different values. He believed that the value of labor can be improved if the working condition is conducive and without exploitation of the workers.

However, Smith strongly believed that payment for the laborers should be rational and be calculated in line with the profit margin to avoid loses. Marx further argued that for the profit to be realized, the fundamental freedom of the workers should not be denied and the wages paid should correspond with the time taken for the duty. He claimed that in capitalism, workers were being exploited in that they worked for more hours and the wages paid do not match-up with the quantity of the work done. However according to Smith, the time taken by a worker depends on the quality of the work done in relation to the value added.

He argued that time do not account for the value of work done as he claimed that in communist mode of production, the value of a worker is reduced since it is characterized with laziness as everybody is doing the same thing. He also argued that in capitalism, people are employed in different areas of specialization hence the value of a worker can be ascertained by the employer. According to Marx, specialization can lead to bureaucracy and create a barrier between the employer and the worker which is against the communal mode of production.

Conclusion
Though the two schools of thought had divergent views on production, both Schools held labor theory attached to value. It is worth noting that in most countries, the economic policies of both scholars are relevant in production. Even though Marxs ideologies were more brilliant in production, it is true to say that he was more concerned with the welfare of the workers and the mathematical values of production. However, Smiths theory on production and labor cost are relevant in the modern economies and preferred by most countries since the principles can be used for teaching and even in analysis hence remain the most dominant and modern theory of production.

Two philosophical works will be related to the movie, The Matrix (1999) and these are Platos Allegory of the Cave and Descartes Evil Demon argument.  At the same time, this paper examines how the following explains whether and why people cannot gain knowledge from their experience a) knowledge as justified, true belief, b) the defeasibility theory, c) the causal theory, and d) reliabilism. Finally, it reflects on the possibility of being in The Matrix.

Platos Allegory of the Cave depicts prisoners who have been imprisoned in the cave since childhood, with their backs turned at the source of light. They could not turn their hands or legs, and so they grew up looking at the same part of the cave. These prisoners, however, do not feel that they are imprisoned. In this cave, puppeteers project different objects on the wall and the prisoners believe them as real. One of the prisoners escapes and discovers light outside, and through reflecting about the light and his position in the universe, he realizes what is real and what is true. He decides to enlighten others, but they rebuke him. They would rather believe in shadows than search for and believe in the truth. The main point of Platos Allegory of the Cave is that people are often deceived to believe their senses, when reality is different from perceptions of reality. Plato suggests that in order to determine the truth, people must act as philosophers, who exert effort and time to understand reality and the truth.

The Matrix shares the same scenarios as the Allegory of the Cave because 1) people are also imprisoned in the shadows of reality, 2) many people would prefer their senses over self-analysis and reflection, 3) those who escape the shadows are not widely believed, and 4) there is an obligation for philosophers to help others see the truth. First, the people trapped in The Matrix also believe in their perceptions of reality, in the same way that the prisoners of the cave believe that the shadows are real. They are all used to this kind of reality and it will be hard to help them escape their cognitive imprisonment. Second, many people would prefer their senses over self-analysis and reflection in The Matrix. For instance, there is even a traitor in the side of Neo, because he would rather want illusions than raw reality. Third, those who escape the shadows are not widely believed. It took a while, for instance, for Morpheus to convince Neo about the reality, which is Zion versus the matrix world. Finally, Neo and the philosophers in the cave all have the obligation to help others escape their imprisonment. These imprisoned people, however, have a choice to make, to choose between reality and illusions.

On the other hand, the Allegory of the Cave is different from The Matrix, because people in the former are not under the slavery of robots. People are the only one imprisoning peoples minds in the cave. There is no widespread slavery of the body that occurs in the cave, in as much as it happens for people outside Zion in The Matrix. Finally, there is something God-like in the matrix, wherein people have yet to tap the God-like powers of their minds, which is not present for the prisoners in the cave. Neo has indication of some powers even in Zion, like he is also God with God-like super strength powers.

Descartes Evil Demon Argument argues that people cannot be certain that their sense experience is not caused by an evil demon. It is possible that there is an evil demon that wants to deceive people. Since people cannot be certain that their sense experience is not caused by an evil demon, they cannot be assured that their sense is real. Since there is no certainty that the sense is real, this means that knowledge cannot be acquired through sense experience. Based on this reasoning, there are similar conditions between Evil Demon and The Matrix. In both kinds of world, there is an evil demon with malevolent aspirations. The evil genius also wants to deceive people and takes benefit, from pleasure I suppose, in doing so. The robots in The Matrix also have evil intentions of enslaving people by turning them into batteries. Second, Evil Demon and The Matrix also describe widespread deception. In The Matrix, robots took pains to create a wired world, wherein people are deceived into believing that they are living a real life that they have control of. In reality, they are deceived to believe they are in power and control, when everything is predetermined for the purposes of slavery and oppression of the dominating robots. The Evil demon also wants to create a world of deception, wherein people feel they see the truth, when they are all illusions.

The main difference between The Matrix and Descartes Evil Demon is that in the matrix, people can escape the deception in a way that they escape the whole world of illusions- the escape involves body and mind. People can escape the matrix and go to Zion. In the Descartes Evil Demon, escape from deception only occurs in the mind, and not in the physical world setting. People cannot escape the world and go to another place, another world called Zion.

This essay proceeds to analyze how theories of knowledge  justification say whether and why the people living inside the Matrix are prevented from gaining knowledge through their experience. First is knowledge as justified, true belief. When people in the matrix believe that what they see, feel and know is real, these beliefs become as justified and true belief, by virtue of the senses. As long as they feel alive, they do not need to think of an alternative existence that could possibly exist. Even their experiences then would not be enough for them to even realize the idea of being deceived.

Second is the defeasibility theory, which states that it is not enough to have evidence that warrants ones beliefs, because it is equally important to know that there is no defeating evidence that one has which can contradict knowledge as justified, true belief (Craig 1998, 270). In this case, people in the matrix already have perceptual evidences that their reality is the truth also, and because of these evidences, they are no longer induced to gain additional knowledge through experience. However, it is possible for them to entertain that the truth they know is only an illusion, if they can see evidence that contradicts what they know. This is what happened to Neo. Morpheus gave him succeeding evidence that demonstrate that illusions are defeated and can be defeated. That opportunity, however, is not always present for people in the matrix, since they are not as special as Neo or the one.
Third is the causal theory, which states that people can believe P, only if there is an appropriate causal connection between the state of affairs that makes P true and persons belief in P (Craig 1998, 263). In the matrix, people come to believe that the reality they see is caused by something real also. As a result, they could hardly analyze that they can understand more about the real reality, when they are experiencing connections that they perceive to be real and causative already.

Fourth is reliabilism, which argues that a belief is justified if and only if it is generated by reliable cognitive process (Pollock and Joseph Cruz 1999). People living inside the Matrix are prevented from gaining knowledge through their experience, because they only rely on sensual experience as the cause or justification of their beliefs. Unless they see some evidence that an alternate world exists, they would not have any other reliable cognitive processes to rely on, aside from their current perceptual beliefs.

Finally, how do we know that we are not in a matrix now I believe that through the defeasibility theory, there is no evidence that can defeat an existing belief in our present reality. If someone can show us that there is such a world as Zion, then we can prove that we are in a matrix. Furthermore, if no one can show the alternative reality, and since many of us are already comfortable with our justified beliefs, then even if Zion exists, we would not even know it. Hence, we can never be certain that we are not in the matrix because there is no one to show us the truth and so we will remain trapped in the shadows that are the reality and truth for us.

Let us put some light on two striking questions. Firstly, what does it mean to be American Secondly, how can be the American dream achieved Being an American means a lot in itself. Being an American is a pride in itself, we are all equally bestowed upon the things the world deems to be essentially American. It seems that it is our values that define us. Along with any culture, we are varied and diverse as people  we come from various religious (and non-religious) backgrounds, different heritages, races, belief systems, family structures, etc. According to President Theodore Roosevelt, being an American means we must owe ourselves to the United States. If an immigrant comes to America in good faith and becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated equally. Any man who says that he is an American, but something else also, isnt an American at all. He has no place here. The real American is the man who has accepted America with heart and soul. He further adds that our nation (America) should be free from the web of squabbling nationalities. What he means to say is to have room for American flag and only American flag. The foreign population must abide by American ideals and talk one language- the English language. There should be loyalty to the American people. But we cant attain such loyalty unless we make people realize that they are entitled to justice and they ought to perform the duties. There is no room for hyphenated and hypocritical Americanism. Roosevelt is very judicious in advocating that our nation must not exploit immigrants as industrial assets as the exploitation of black people took place many years ago. The Let alone policy pursued so far has far reaching bad effects. This policy has led to false impression on laborers, immigrants and the natives about their receiving justice. Taking a personal point of view on Americanism, we are a nation that is home to people who tread the path of Christianity, Islam, Catholicism, the Protestant religions, and those who reject religion outright. We are a nation of people following monogamy, unmarried people who choose to lead their lives together. Roosevelt is analogous to this in saying that all of us irrespective of the land from where we have come must stand shoulder to shoulder for eradication of racism and injustice. All big or small are entitled to justice.

We must maintain an American standard of living. Only a strong democracy can help to achieve it. The strengthening of relations with other countries is important. This complies with the fact that we are not a people of one color, caste or creed, of one belief system, etc. We value our constitution, whether or not we always actively protect that document. Being an American does not demand of us to become religious in any sense. It does not require us to blend with a particular culture or belief system. What defines an American are the ideas present within our minds and the values of our souls. I would suggest that that one should at all time be American, since being un-American is a terrible tag to bear. But who is the arbiter of what is or isnt American. In my opinion the White House is the ultimate arbiter of what is American in the eyes of the world, since it is the administration that makes and enforces American policies globally. To be an American, it is not required of us to stand by our government  infact, if one looks at the great history of America dissent has been spirit of America. The greatest Americans were those who held out the greatest protests against the ruling powers. We must not give support to the actions of our military at the cost of our government  indeed, the greatest Americans are those who would stand in front of a tank to stop the scourge and curse of war. So all this alludes that being an American is just like feeling at the top of the world.

Next question is- what is an American dream The term was first used by James Truslow Adams in his book The Epic of America which was written in 1931. He states that the American Dream is that dream of a land in which life should be better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement. Now, how does one achieve the American Dream One component of the American Dream seems, however, to be fairly consistent in the quest for money. Few will deny that Americans are consciously focused on the almighty dollar. Yet the question remains, how does one achieve this success How is the Dream realized For many Americans the formula is one of instant and elusive gratification. Rather than sticking to a traditional work ethic, far too many Americans are pinning their hopes on what they take for easy money. We should bear in mind that instant wealth has not always been a major component of the Dream. Americans have, in an orthodox way, concentrated their efforts on frugality and diligence. The term American Dream is used in many ways, but quintessentially the American Dream is a concept that proposes that all people can succeed by the dint of hard work, and that all people have the capability to lead prosperous and successful lives. Many people have elaborated and refined the definition of the American Dream, and this concept has also been subjected to a great deal of cynicism. Many people are of the belief the idealistic goal of the American Dream lies in the structure of the American society, alluding to examples of discrimination of caste, creed and color which suggest that the American Dream is not able to be realized and attainable for everyone. The people who believe in the American dream are of the opinion that everything is attainable through hard work. The person who manages to achieve his or her version of the American Dream may be said to be living the dream, and everyone has his own interpretation of what the American Dream might be. Radically, the American Dream is about optimism and the capability for change, and one can argue that people, who try to bring change in some way, even a small way, are living the dream. It is not that the American dream cannot be realized, but it is the guts and courage required of a person to realize it and live his life to the fullest.

Pornography is broadly defined as any sexually overt material which is developed or produced to arouse sexual interest or provide erotic satisfaction. Many people find the use of Pornography very offensive. It is easily available at the stores and online sources. This easy availability leads to a debate as to whether it should be restricted or legalized. This easy access places no restriction on who should be accessing it and making it accessible to young children and hence corrupting the society and increasing sex crimes especially among juveniles. I believe that Pornography encourages sex crimes and leads to negative activities in the society. It harms children and results in rape, teenage pregnancies, violence, aggression and sexually transmitted diseases through sexual activities and prostitution. Hence I believe that there should be a restriction placed on the sexual content available and Pornography should be censored.

Stages of Addiction to Pornography

There are a total of 5 stages of addiction to Pornography. Early exposure It is the first time one gets in contact with Pornography. The second one is Pornography addiction Slowly and gradually it starts to become an addiction. It becomes a regular part of ones life and a person becomes hooked up and cant quit. The third stage is Escalation Then one starts to surf more and look for more graphic Pornography. What was disgusting to a person earlier now starts to become exciting. The fourth stage is Desensitization One becomes immune to the material and becomes numb to the images. Even it leads to desperation to feel the same thrill again. The fifth and the last stage is Acting out sexually The most harmful effect of Pornography is when it starts to affect other people in that persons life. This is the point where men make a crucial jump and start acting out the images they have seen. When they start acting out with real people in their lives, it becomes destructive.

Harmful effects of Pornography

The production of Pornographic videos and websites makes huge amounts of money around the world. They try to attract people and make sure that people come back and buy more. However the biggest problem with Pornography is that it instills shallowness among people and makes them believe that relationships are built on sex, rather than on commitment, caring and mutual trust. In reality, I believe that a relationship is about being with someone who cares for you, loves you and accepts you the way you are, someone who is committed to you and wants to spend the rest of hisher life with you, someone you can give yourself completely to, and sex is just a part of a relationship. And this love, care, trusts and commitment makes sex a great mutual experience. However, Pornographic material focuses on nothing but weird ways of having sex which leads to those who view it as love which is nothing but fulfilling your sexual desires in the ways depicted in Pornography.

The children who are repeatedly exposed to Pornography are referred to as sexually reactive children and adolescents. These are the group of people who are more vulnerable and likely to experience damaging effects from Pornography. This is because they are a high-risk group for a variety of aggressive behaviors. According to a research, the children who view Pornography are more likely to display aggressive behaviors rather than those who did not. Hence Pornography leads to aggressiveness among youth and teenagers which can later cause domestic violence in their lives.

Moreover, another study was conducted, a meta-analysis to determine whether non-experimental studies revealed an association between mens Pornographic consumption and their attitudes supporting violence against women. The results showed a positive correlation between viewing Pornography and attitudes supporting violence against women. Furthermore, such attitudes were found to correlate significantly higher when a person views sexually violent Pornography rather than viewing nonviolent Pornography.

Another major negative impact is that it affects marriages and families. Sometimes, the aggressive behavior is faced by the spouses resulting in strained marriages and often, divorces. In todays world, Pornography is easily accessible in various different forms. Perhaps the easiest way to find pornography is the World Wide Web which has a total of 260 million WebPages and 7 of those carry pornography.  The simplicity of this has aided in the boost of how wide spread Pornography has become. Besides the internet, there are a huge number of adult bookstores along with theme stores.

Many people may argue that Pornography spreads awareness and it is a means to educate however this is completely wrong. Pornography is not meant to educate, it is meant to sell. It completely twists the truth and spreads wrong images about the realities of life. The following are the myths that are spread in Pornographic images and videos

The Pornography videos depict that women are less human and degrading than men. It refers to females as animals, toys, or body parts. The idea that women are real human beings with thoughts and emotions is clearly neglected. It depicts women as a property of men. It displays women like merchandise in a magazine, exposing them completely for the buyer to look at. It seems to display that women can actually be bought. It instills shallowness and tries to show that a womans value depends on the attractiveness of her body and hence those women who are fat or have less attractive figures feel a blow to their self esteem. It encourages sex crimes such as rape. Sometimes women are shown being raped in pornography which is a very negative image regarding a society Pornography teaches men that pleasure lies in injuring and abusing women for entertainment. It encourages sex among young children. One of the biggest sellers in Pornography is imitation child Pornography. The women are fabricated to look like little girls by wearing pony tails or holding toys etc. This leads the user to view kids as sexual objects It encourages illegal sex and prostitution. It has dangerous items thrown in to make sex more fascinating.  It also gives a very glamorous picture of prostitution. It is also likely to make kids victims of sexual aggression.

The influence of Pornography usually results in unexpected pregnancies, sexual illnesses, and sexual obsession. Due to its adverse effect on teenagers the rate of pregnancy in teens has risen. Many researches have shown that sex addicts have admitted that Pornography is very considerate to their obsession. It may also influence other children to imitate sexual behavior or might harm other children sexually. As child psychology tells us that children often do things what they have seen, heard or read they can do much harm to the other children who are weaker or smaller or younger. The exposure to Pornography hinders a childs mind, his development and his identity.

Conclusion
Hence it shakes the basic foundations of a society which are built on love and respect for one another. It kills a persons emotions to judge someone on the basis of their personality rather they judge people on their body and looks. A society should be deeply rooted on moral principles of respect and should provide a healthy lifestyle for children as well as adults to live in. Pornography neglects this basic living fundamental. It has been proven to have a multitude of negative side effects with no positive attributes what so ever. It conflicts with the religious teachings and offends and harms society in various ways. The religious people claim that GOD created mankind, made sexual intercourse in order to carry on their family names and is only allowed after the marriage. Pornography makes a person more and more lustrous and makes him a slave of sex resulting in addiction and harmful influences on the society. It also shakes the morals and ethics of the person and the surroundings.  Constant exposure to Pornography may result in moderate pleasure and create a strong craving for more brutal and aggressive material. Pornography also degrades women in many ways, most of the times women are treated as toys, and are abused. It restricts a womens value upon her body or figure making them no different than other items in bought by people for personal satisfaction.

The cynic legacy attributed to Socrates or even to Jesus has contemporary relevance by operating as signals or reminders of dire yet overlooked problems in society but criticisms not grounded on sound solutions become mere useless ranting. The cynic movement went through periods of decline and revival that evolved the idea of cynical philosophy. This may have a different conceptualization at present but the relevance of cynic legacy remains. The cynic legacy should be rediscovered in the modern context to reinforce its modern day relevance. Cynic Legacy

The development of the cynic movement has been attributed to the ancient Greek philosopher Anthistenes, who was a student of Socrates (Eddy, 1996). The movement emerged because of its distinction from contemplative philosophy as primarily driven by both rhetoric and physical action instead of isolation and reflection (Kennedy, 1999). Although, there is no consensus over an encompassing description of the movement, there are four common aspects of the movement. The first and second are criticism as the primary expression or tool of cynic philosophers and delivery of criticism using rhetorical techniques delivered to the public as audience (Kennedy, 1999). The third and fourth are deviation from convention to make a statement and divergence from materialism (Eddy, 1996). Typical cynics were shabby or unkempt with longish hair, untrimmed beard, money pouch for begging, and a staff. They are often seen in public places addressing people with their loud and strong speeches.

Cynicism has been used to describe Jesus in efforts to capture him in history. The physical appearance of the typical Greek cynic and the pictures of Jesus in literature attest to similarities. Jesus exposure to the culture of Lower Galilee, described as Hellenistic (Eddy, 1996), was attributed to the adoption of Jesus of the cynic philosophy. The lifestyle and activities of Jesus also led to his classification as a cynic. Jesus was a wanderer and encouraged movement from one place to another to learn and share ideas. The teachings of Jesus were socially relevant. He advocated a life of simplicity and was critical of the materialism during his time. Jesus was often seen in highly populated places addressing the public with his critical speeches. There was also strong opposition to the consideration of Jesus as a cynic. However, evidence that Jesus is not a cynic is also disputable. As such, Jesus can be considered a cynic, albeit his cynical practice may have differences in form when compared to Socratic cynicism. It is the similarities in ideas that hold modern day relevance.

Contemporary Relevance of the Cynic Legacy
A legacy of the Socratic cynicism or that of Jesus cynicism is the philosophy of action (Kennedy, 1999) and change. The contemporary society can be described as wallowing in a culture of complacence to its detriment. An example is the financial crisis that turned into a recession. The majority opinion is that relaxed regulation of the subprime market allowed excessive engagement of firms into risky investments or activities that actualized the risk. The attitude favoring high returns in a short time at high risks by investors, business firms and households also reinforced risky practices by financial and banking firms. The cynic legacy of doing instead of just thinking is an alternative to complacence. An attitude of action aligned with the cynic legacy can lead to careful investments in promising ventures such as green technology or in firms with strong drive to making life better. This can also find expression in lobbying andor protesting for Congress to reform laws to provide sufficient regulation. The aggregate of advocacies in action creates change, which if driven by the problem-solving approach can mean positive change. People take notice of the need for change and their role in change if the message in expressed in an unconventional manner such as protests and marches expressed in various media. There are many creative ways of protesting including the nudity and being caged by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and other similarly outrageous but attention-grabbing activities. These are extreme modes of getting through to a complacent public.

Another cynic legacy is advocacy of social issues (Eddy, 1996 Kennedy, 1999). Advocacy is having a deep understanding of an issue and strong concern over an issue to drive solution-driven action. Advocacy in the context of social movements presupposes that the issue is of significant social concern. The perspective is oriented towards other people or society in general. In ancient Greece, the strongest concern was the control of the aristocrats over politics and resources making governance susceptible to corruption. During the time of Jesus, one issue was the abuse of the Pharisees in exacting offerings and the government in collecting taxes. Now, similar issues remain but operate in the context of complex contemporary situations. Taxation is an issue of accountability, especially with a statewide and federal deficit, which is attributable in part to spending on the offensive war on terrorism. A barrage of other social issues that require public awareness to translate into action is covered by cynic philosophy. Again, the publics attention is better drawn via extreme or radical modes of expression.

Still another cynic legacy is representation of marginal groups (Kennedy, 1999). The purpose of cynic philosophers in making a public spectacle is not only to catch the attention of the majority but also to express the interests of the minority. In ancient Greece, cynics lambasted the aristocracy for being a majority in wealth at the expenses of the peasants and workers. Jesus openly spoke against the discrimination of women and people with disability. Now, minority is multidimensional encompassing gender, race, and age. Health care is a social issue for marginal groups, especially immigrants, with the expected health care reforms. The Obama administration received a barrage of criticism via the media from commentators coming from various fields. While the republicans may have taken advantage of the issue, criticisms of the health care reform served as pressure to ensure that interests of minority groups are also addressed.

Modern Cynic Philosophy
The contemporary understanding of cynic philosophy has deviated from the cynic legacy of the Greeks and that of Jesus. Cynicism now is considered as mere tirades for personal interest and complaining without providing solutions or complaining but without participating in efforts to find solutions (Mazella, 2007). This is not necessarily without basis. People have grown tired of the usual mode of protest or marches that turn out to be politicized. The public has also developed immunity to media criticisms based on concerns for ratings. Now, the cynic philosophy has evolved into a destructive and non-progressive movement that may have done more harm than good. Displeasure over cynic tirades may even be one reason for complacency. While modern day cynic philosophy may have become more or less useless, the cynic legacy of Socrates and his students and from Jesus still offers some good.  

Conclusion
The cynic legacy, which refers to the Socratic philosophy or that attributed to Jesus, has relevance in the modern period by calling for action and change, advocating social issues, and representing marginal groups. While the cynic legacy has received its share of criticisms then and now, its core ideas remain important even today. It has evolved today to become more of a bane than a boon. However if cynic philosophy were to regain its relevance, this should be rediscovered in the present context. Outrageous speeches and shabbiness were used to achieve the purposes of cynic philosophy in the ancient period. Now, outrageous can be more creative or innovative to achieve the same goals of building awareness to find solutions.

In answering this essay, it is important to provide a short discussion regarding the two opposite faces of freedom or liberty which will the culprit of our essay. Discussions from John Stuart Mill up to Isaiah Berlin categorized liberty or freedom in two kinds, the positive and negative liberty, or in our case freedom for (negative) and freedom from (positive). The freedom for or negative liberty are the rights that limit the coercion of compulsory and impulsive actions from an outside actor ( i.e government or state). Sample of these freedoms are freedom of religion, freedom of speech etc. The positive freedom or liberty however, or in our case freedom from are the sets of freedom which aims to achieve certain ends ( i.e self mastery or self realization). This includes freedom from poverty or freedom from unemployment.

It is important to take note that in both practice and theory, the right wing of the political debate tend to adopt a more negative approach to liberty. On the other hand, the left wing tends to emphasized a more positive approach to freedom. This includes totalitarian ideologies such as Stalinism and Communism. With this respect, it is important to remember that the United States of America is a liberal democracy at its core, therefore it will be not difficult to follow that USA is attached to a negative approach to liberty.

To prove this we are going to examine two of the most leading categories of negative freedom.

Freedom of Information and Freedom of the Press
It has been regarded that the publics right for information and knowing is one of the core principles of the American society. Historically, it can be rooted to the appeal of the first citizens of America against the imposition of strict laws against the flow of ideas and information by their British rulers. As a result, in their establishment of their own government, they acknowledged the right of the public for a free flow of information. The first amendment of the United States constitution reflects this desire.

Congress shall make no law  abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press  That protection from control by the federal government meant that anyone -- rich or poor, and regardless of political or religious beliefs -- could generally publish whatever he or she wished.

These few lines served and secure the publication of information since the time of simple publications such as newspapers, pamphlets and book up to our modern ways of communication and publication such as the television, radio and the use of the internet. In the USA, laws rarely forbids or limits the media in its scope and function. In contrast, many cases  had shown that many law had been passed to protect the press freedom and its actors.  Some of the examples are The Privacy Act of 1974 which  regulates the collection and dissemination of personal information contained in the files of federal agencies and the other one is the Privacy Protection Act of 1980 which protected the newsroom from the searches of the police. The Freedom of Information Act of 1966 opened up the executive branch records for public use and for the scrutiny of the press. It is also important to note that courts have regarded the press as a watchdog for the government.

With this information in hand, it is not difficult to acknowledge the high degree of freedom enjoyed by the public in terms of information and the mass media.

Freedom of Religion
The United States of America is regarded as one of the most religious country in the world. According to a 2006 report by the Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, some 87 percent of Americans surveyed described themselves as affiliated with some religion. Eighty-two percent reported Christian affiliation . Other religions accounted for 5 percent of the population, including Jews with 2 percent and Muslims with 1 percent. Agnostics, atheists, and those with no religious affiliation made up at least 11 percent of the population (D.W 2009).

Historically speaking, the United States has a mixed record in promoting the freedom of religion. Despite United States heritage of religious liberty like acting as a sanctuary for religious refugees who fled from countries that oppressed them, we cannot disregard different atrocities that were done by the American people. Who can forget the  public execution of Quakers in mid-17th century Massachusetts Bay Colony to the expulsion of Mormons from Missouri in 1838-39 to the discrimination many Muslim Americans felt following 911. However, today we can the acknowledgement of the strengthening the freedom of religion. However, the recent speech of US President Barack Obama in Cairo, Egypt had shown a move to the next level in the conception and implementation of the freedom of religion not only in the United States but also in the world. Nevertheless, we must also take note that historically speaking, the past leaders of the United States already established laws to promote freedom of religion. For example, in 1790, Washington pledged to the congregation of the Touro Synagogue in Newport, Rhode Island, that the new republic would give to bigotry no sanction, to persecution no assistance. Article 11 of the 1796 Treaty of Tripoli, which was signed under Washington and approved by the Senate after Adams became president in 1797, declared that the government of the United States is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion. This provision is often cited as a clear, early statement that the U.S. government is religiously neutral.

Deviation from Negative Liberty
After the terrorist attack on September 11, 2001 and the passing of the USA PATRIOT in 2001 , it can be argued that the United States is shifting from a negative conception of liberty to a positive conception of freedom. According to Matthew Robinson in his paper entitled Freedom in an Era of Terror A Critical Analysis of the USA Patriot Act,  Legal experts have suggested that the USA PATRIOT Act erodes elements of several of the Bill of Rights to the US Constitution. This includes the First Amendment (freedom of speech and assembly), Fourth Amendment (freedom from unreasonable search and seizure), Fifth Amendment (right to due process of law), Sixth Amendment (right to speedy, public, and fair trials, right to confront accusers, and right to a criminal defense), and Eighth Amendment (freedom from excessive and cruel  unusual punishment).

Some of the examples cited are the ability of government agencies to search peoples records such as financial, medical, educational and other personal records. Additionally, the wiretapping of cellphones, telephones and the tracking of emails and website visited are now permitted by the law. More over,  citizens can be detained against their will and refused access to lawyers, based on secret evidence.

Conclusion
It will be safe to say that the United States has a long history of a negative approach to liberty. However, recent events in the history such as the rise of terrorism had triggered a switch from a negative approach to liberty to a positive one. In my opinion, I believe that different circumstances requires different measures and actions. If a negative approach to liberty had managed to fit the historical context in the last 300 years, it does not follow that it will still be best approach in our times today. If the people in the government can justify and prove that a shift to our idea and approach is necessary for us to survive, I am more than willing to give way to the policies and laws inspired by a positive approach to liberty even if it can give us  a little same picture of some of the socialist states.

Gender roles are behaviors, attitudes, values and beliefs considered appropriate for either males or females by a particular cultural group or a society. Different societies or groups have different expectations from their males and females. It should be noted that gender roles affect the way we behave at our homes, in our workplaces and even in our schools.

I was born in America by a middle class family and I am a Catholic. I accept the fact that ladies are allowed to dress neatly but I am against their putting on of tight clothes as this exposes their body which may cause the men sin in their minds which is ungodly. I do not support the piercing of ears by males as this is associated with homosexuality and the Bible only recognizes the male-female attraction heterosexuality. Women should be careful with the people they hang out with and should not stay out late otherwise they may be seen as being disrespectful. In the church male priests conduct masses only as it this is supported by the Bible. In my opinion, the above values and others not mentioned should be observed for the smooth running of the society.

It should be noted that not all the societal values are supported by everyone. I am against the thought that male persons excel in certain subjects more than ladies and that ladies should avoid this subjects in school. I believe that as much effort can be put in by ladies as men and achieve the same. No jobs should only be retained for either ladies or males alone they should all be treated equally. Men should be free to take up secretarial work, nursing and teaching in the primary grades as they wish and ladies to pursue careers and research in science and technology as they may prefer (Rathus, Nevid and Rathus, 2007). Socially, males are the acceptable parties to make moves on women or to initiate sexual interactions while the ladies should be gatekeepers and should wait till they are approached (Rathus, Nevid and Rathus, 2007). This reflects on the fact that men are sexually aggressive and that ladies are sexually passive but I think all should be given a chance to exercise their desires as they may want to.

My family is one of the major factors that influenced these values I have developed. It was always there for me leading my way and taught me what is right and wrong. In addition, influence came from my religion which emphasizes on doing right at all times and giving an equal opportunity to all. The society can not be ruled out from these, it sums up all the other factors.