In modern world, marriage is still a solution of poverty. These problems do not receive much publicity, because for some people they are too intimate or dedicated, they touch personal feelings and human soul. Modern values and world perception has less in common with 17th or 19th century life philosophy, but the question of marriage is still a topical one. Media portrays the problem of marriage problem both satirically and dramatically unveiling contradictions arisen in the modern state. Soap operas and TV shows address the issue of marriage from different perspectives including romantic relations and divorce, morality and ethics of pre-arranged marriage. Modern interpretations involve a radical change in the nature of society and the structures of marriage (Smith, 1998). The conditions of possibility, in which such a life can be attempted to be lived, take the view that the institutions of the modern marriage do have the potential for accommodating a range of spheres of life such as private morality and economic activity (Gallagher, Whitehead, 1997).
Family is an important social institution which has a great impact on social relations and society in general. “Marriage A-la Mode” unveils moral and social problems dominated in the society. In these conditions, Hogarth’s satires dwell on the darker side of human nature, including his love of jokes and riddles. In his work, a spirit of mischievous and subversive anarchy runs through his vivid images of family life and human relations. Thesis social and moral problems depicted by Hogarth more than two centuries ago are still in evidence today.
On Foucault's account, modern control of sexuality parallels moderncontrol of criminality by making sex (like crime) an object ofallegedly scientific disciplines, which simultaneously offer knowledgeand domination of their objects. However, it becomes apparent thatthere is a further dimension in the power associated with the sciencesof sexuality. Not only is there control exercised via others' knowledgeof individuals; there is also control via individuals' knowledge ofthemselves. Individuals internalize the norms laid down by the sciencesof sexuality and monitor themselves in an effort to conform to thesenorms. Thus, they are controlled not only as objects ofdisciplines but also as self-scrutinizing and self-formingsubjects.
—. “The Shape of Anti-Clericalism and the English Reformation.” Politics and Society in Reformation Europe: Essays for Sir Geoffrey Elton. Ed. E.I. Kouri and T. Scott. New York: St. Martin’s, 1987. 378-410.
Essay on hypocrisy in modern society
—. “Social Outlook and Preaching in a Wycliffite Sermones Dominicales Collection.” Church and Chronicle in the Middle Ages: Essays Presented to John Taylor. Ed. Ian Wood and G.A. Loud. London: Hambledon, 1991. 179-91.
Disqus - Essay on hypocrisy in modern society
Conceivably, it is correct that the technical experts who will (or hope to) manage the “industrial society” will be able to cope with the classical problems without a radical transformation of society. It is conceivably true that the bourgeoisie was right in regarding the special conditions of its emancipation as the only general conditions by which modern society would be saved. In either case, an argument is in order, and skepticism is justified when none appears.
Huck Finn - Hypocrisy of Society Essay - 693 Words | …
Since its beginnings with Socrates, philosophy has typically involvedthe project of questioning the accepted knowledge of the day. Later,Locke, Hume, and especially, Kant developed a distinctively modernidea of philosophy as the critique of knowledge. Kant's greatepistemological innovation was to maintain that the same critique thatrevealed the limits of our knowing powers could also reveal necessaryconditions for their exercise. What might have seemed just contingentfeatures of human cognition (for example, the spatial and temporalcharacter of its objects) turn out to be necessary truths. Foucault,however, suggests the need to invert this Kantian move. Rather thanasking what, in the apparently contingent, is actually necessary, hesuggests asking what, in the apparently necessary, might becontingent. The focus of his questioning is the modern human sciences(biological, psychological, social). These purport to offer universalscientific truths about human nature that are, in fact, often mereexpressions of ethical and political commitments of a particularsociety. Foucault's “critical philosophy” undermines suchclaims by exhibiting how they are just the outcome of contingenthistorical forces, and are not scientifically grounded truths.