Read the following excerpt and answer the questions.
The Conquest of Happiness,
Chapter Nine: Fear of Public Opinion, Bertrand Russell
In the Modern world, owing to the swiftness of
locomotion, people are less dependent than they used to be upon their
geographically nearest neighbors. Those who have cars can regard as a neighbor
any person living within twenty miles. They have therefore a much greater power
than was formerly the case of choosing their companions. In any populous
neighborhood a man must be very unfortunate if he cannot find congenial souls
within twenty miles. The idea that one should know one’s immediate neighbors
has died out in large centers of population, but still lingers in small towns
and in the country. It has become a foolish idea, since there is no need to be
dependent upon immediate neighbors for society. More and more it becomes
possible to choose our companions on account of congeniality rather than on account
of mere propinquity. Happiness is promoted by associations of persons with
similar tastes and similar opinions. Social intercourse may be expected to
develop more and more along these lines, and it may be hoped that by these
means the loneliness that now afflicts so many unconventional people will be
gradually diminished almost to vanishing point. This will undoubtedly increase
their happiness, but it will of course diminish the sadistic pleasure with the
conventional at present derive from having the unconventional at their mercy. I
do not think, however, that this is a pleasure which we need be greatly
concerned to preserve.
Fear of public opinion, like every other form of
fear, is oppressive and stunts growth. It is difficult to achieve any kind of
greatness while a fear of this kind remains strong, and it is impossible to
acquire that freedom of spirit in which true happiness consists, for it is essential
to happiness that our way of living should spring from our own deep impulses
and not from the accidental tastes and desire of those who happen to be our neighbors,
or even our relations. Fear of immediate neighbors is no doubt less than it
was, but there is a new kind of fear, namely, the fear of what newspapers may
say. This is quite as terrifying as anything connected with medieval witch
hunts. When the newspaper chooses to make a scapegoat of some perhaps quite
harmless person, the results may be very terrible. Fortunately, as yet this is
a fate which most people escape through their obscurity; but as publicity gets
more and more perfect in its methods, there will be an increasing danger in
this novel form of social persecution. This is too grave a matter to be treated
with disdain by the individual who is its victim, and whatever may be thought
of the great principle of the freedom of the press, I think the line will have
to be drawn more sharply than it is by the existing libel laws, and anything
will have to be forbidden that makes life intolerable for innocent individuals,
even if they should happen to have done or said things which, published
maliciously, can cause them to become unpopular. The only ultimate cure for
this evil is, however, an increase of toleration on the part of the public. The
best way to increase toleration is to multiply the number of individuals who
enjoy real happiness and not therefore find their chief pleasure in the
infliction of pain upon their fellow men.
1.
This passage was written around
1930. The author says, “Social intercourse may be expected to develop more and
more along these lines, and it may be hoped that by these means the loneliness
that now afflicts so many unconventional people will be gradually diminished
almost to vanishing point.” Has this prediction come true? If so, how?
2.
Has social media such as SNS
increased the “fear of public opinion”?
3.
The author says that doing what
you really want to do will lead to real happiness and, in turn, tolerance to
others with different tastes and opinions. Do you think globalization of
communication will contribute to this process?
4.
What other aspects of society than
those written in the passage has social media had its influence on?
Sample answers
1.
I think the author’s prediction has come true,
especially since the advent of the Internet, which provides opportunities to
contact and bond with people across the world. This makes it easier to find someone
sharing the same tastes and ideas and those with new ideas will also have more
chances to find people who have the same kind of new ideas and opinions as
theirs.
2.
Unfortunately, social media is
a double edged sward and has increased the fear of public opinion. Compared to
the era of newspapers, the speed and scale of the information circulation is
exponential. A rumor can be literally shared by people all over the world in a
second. Also, what is transmitted is not only words and pictures but also video
and sound; hence, egregious harassments which were unthinkable before keep
ruining the lives of targets, many of whom commit suicides. Moreover, anonymity
protected by the system has increased the possibility of anyone becoming
victims. Therefore, few can be indifferent to scapegoating now.
3. a. I
understand Russell believes that people who enjoy inflicting pain on others, especially
those who are different, are also oppressed and can liberate their mind by
listening to the true voice of their heart as technology helps them open their
eyes and see the outer world, and I agree with him. Things have been improving
gradually as technology and media expose us to more information than before.
For example, living together before marriage had to be done in discreet 30
years ago, but now it can be talked about openly as more people share many more
ideas about happier marriage and relationship. Female managers, single mothers,
and gays are less discriminated against than they were 15 years ago as more
people came out and/or reported their plight on the net. Changes in public
opinions have been taking place in many aspects of life and society. It can be
said that the more accessible information becomes, the freer and happier people
will become, which will reduce our desire to oppress those who act differently.
b. I doubt that globalization of
communication will liberate people mentally and make them more open-minded. You
can lead a horse to the river but cannot force it to drink. For example, people
who hate a particular group of people proliferate despite this flood of
information. Neo-Nazis, KKK, violent right-wingers, or Islamic extremists still
exist, and even seem to be increasing in their numbers. Preconception or dogma
often make some people blind and lose natural respect to others regardless of the
reality they face. Moreover, unlike TV or newspaper, which provide varieties of
information one-sidedly for better or worse, the Internet tends to learn your
taste and narrower the range of information supply, excluding what you are not
interested in or dislike. This system of filtering information can be producing
more narrow-minded individuals than before. I think technology will contribute
to freeing the mind of only those who are ready to be freed.
4. ♦mass movements of huge scale (e.g.
Arab Spring, Occupy Wall Street, mass movements on environmental issues in
China)
♦decentralization of information
management (e.g. WikiLeaks (a whistle-blowing site which allow people who
happen to find injustice in governments or huge corporations to report it anonymously,
spread of information through Twitter and Facebook before official
announcement, blogs supplementing or replacing editorials and Op-Ed, new
business opportunities for individuals and small businesses)
♦grass-roots relief operations and
researches (e.g. the Great East Japan Earthquake victims and radiation level
researches, data collection)