# data[].attributes.body
Your avatar

Add comment
Sabrina Tankersley

Anonymous
8h
Sabrina Tankersley
(Responding @Ms. P's question about double think) I agree with Sarah because I don't think that doublethink is truly possible because you have strong beliefs and opinions about something and couldn't truly believe in the other side of your position. In an instance, you could believe in one thing and then in another you could believe in something else, but not at the same time, which is part of the definition of doublethink.
favorite_border
0
Your avatar

Add comment
sarah nevares

Sarah Nevares
8h
sarah nevares
favorite_border
0
Your avatar

Add comment
daisy obregon

Daisy Obregon
8h
daisy obregon
responding to the starting question: I think that double think can occur in certain situations. I think that there are grey areas that exist which means that you must believe two things at the same time. An example is we should believe that we should not 🤬 anyone, however killing for self-defense is acceptable.
favorite_border
0
1 comment

William Fiero 8h
Bill Fiero
Your avatar

Add comment

# data[].attributes.body
Your avatar

Add comment
Sabrina Tankersley

Anonymous
8h
Sabrina Tankersley
(Responding @Ms. P's question about double think) I agree with Sarah because I don't think that doublethink is truly possible because you have strong beliefs and opinions about something and couldn't truly believe in the other side of your position. In an instance, you could believe in one thing and then in another you could believe in something else, but not at the same time, which is part of the definition of doublethink.
favorite_border
0
Your avatar

Add comment
sarah nevares

Sarah Nevares
8h
sarah nevares
favorite_border
0
Your avatar

Add comment
daisy obregon

Daisy Obregon
8h
daisy obregon
responding to the starting question: I think that double think can occur in certain situations. I think that there are grey areas that exist which means that you must believe two things at the same time. An example is we should believe that we should not 🤬 anyone, however killing for self-defense is acceptable.
favorite_border
0
1 comment

William Fiero 8h
Bill Fiero
Your avatar

Add comment

# data[].attributes.body
I love everything about jason

# data[].attributes.body
I would probably confrom at first then rebl because I would realize how bad the gov is

# data[].attributes.body
I would rebel. If I believed so strongly in something and I was so passionate I would do anything I could to ensure my safety and I would do anything to get there.

# data[].attributes.body
From the point of view of a democratic government, the needs of the many far outweigh the needs of the few. The whole point of a democratic government is the make the decision that promotes the majority without being unfair to particular groups.

# data[].attributes.body
I would probably rebel in Julia's way. Not necessarily sex, but in other ways, like talking to people openly about the government.

# data[].attributes.body
If I was alive in 1984, I would do whatever possible. I feel like I would rebel and fight for what I believe is right.

# data[].attributes.body
To answer Evan’s question, again it depends. Things like torture is never okay, no matter the end result. But, if it was something similar to like what Sylvia said, helping others, then it might be better to think of people as a whole.

# data[].attributes.body
you gotta fight the system man

# data[].attributes.body
Answering Evan's question, I think that the needs of the many does outweigh the means of the few, as unfortunate as that sounds, if one person would die because of a disease but we would need this person to die to potentially save thousands of other lives, I think that the government would definitely choose the one person dying over the thousands

# data[].attributes.body
I think that there is a balance between caring about a whole community versus caring about a specific individual. For example, while each individual is important, it is impossible for a large entity to care about each individual. Therefore, systems, such as that of the United States, must divide power so that both the community and the individual are cared for. From federal to familial, both the community and the commuter should be taken care of if at all possible.

# data[].attributes.body
If the 10 people can survive without much assistance then of course help the few not the many.

# data[].attributes.body
@ Evan's question about prioritizing the majority of minority, I believe that it depends on the situation and objective. For example if the one person is the only person that can pass on important information or something, its more important where if the goal is to sustain a population, the majority is more important. Both are immoral in some way.

# data[].attributes.body
Good job bravo!

# data[].attributes.body
I think that it depends on what is happening. I believe that everyone needs to be aware of their limit. It all depends on how we are approaching the situation and that we approach it effectively rather than rationally.

# data[].attributes.body
It depends on what is being limited, like Jessica said. To an extent, it can be necessary. The government needs to be aware of their limits.

# data[].attributes.body
Going off of what Sylvia is saying about the general welfare of the whole community, that also plays a part in forcing people to conform because our government, for example, will generally make laws that benefit the general population vs just one out of the hundreds of millions of people that live in the US

# data[].attributes.body
ends justify teh means
taking a life - changes with the situation
cannibalism  = no
self defense = yes

# data[].attributes.body
Answering Evan's question, I think that the needs of the many does outweigh the means of the few, as unfortunate as that sounds, if one person would die because of a disease but we would need this person to die to potentially save thousands of other lives, I think that the government would definitely choose the one person dying over the thousands

# data[].attributes.body
AHH The ends never justify the means. Simply because something ends well, we cannot excuse the harmful methods used to achieve that result.

# data[].attributes.body
All guns should be illegal. Why do we need guns??? Nobody needs them and if nobody has them nothing can happen because of them. Get rid of guns and all gun related problems will be solved.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Sabrina because I agree with Sylvia because age restricts many freedoms/activities already, but I guess there is a difference between rights and privileges.

# data[].attributes.body
The needs of the many should outweigh the needs of the few. But if the few are the future of the society, they are the priority.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Sylvia because age restricts many freedoms/activities already, but I guess there is a difference between rights and privileges. Example: speech vs driving

# data[].attributes.body
we need to talk more about stairs

# data[].attributes.body
Responding to Grace's question, the government does have to restrict freedoms to ensure people's safety in a very practical sense. Of course we have to have laws in order to preven chaos.

# data[].attributes.body
#givehugsnotfear

# data[].attributes.body
I agree to an extent that putting restrictions on a person's freedom in order to keep the country safe. It would be ok to keep the peace by restricting some freedom in order to keep things running smoothly.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Evan that it is unavoidable that some freedoms be taken away because it already happens today. To keep people safe , laws must be put in place.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree that some freedoms should be restricted for the sake of safety and to hold people accountable.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that the government should be allowed to restrict certain information to an extent as well. Stedman told my bio class, that an individual human can be smart, but put a group of humans together and it will be terrible and we as a group of organisms will think rationally instead of logically.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with @Antonio that the government should be allowed to restrict certain information depending on the situation especially in times of war or if the information would do more harm. The US government does that already with the Espionage Act and "Clear and Present Danger"

# data[].attributes.body
A government should not be run off fear. Fear ies a sense of urgency in individuals which causes them to make harsh and ill-advised decisions. Instead we must give hugs. Hug your neighbor, hug your mailman and hug the DMV lady. People need hugs not fear.

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that a government based in fear cannot be stable. If a government is based in fear, it is obviously a cruel and unjust government. With every cruel and unjust government, it is only a matter of time until enough people are driven to the point of rebellion to overthrow the government. The government  of 1984, however, is not one based solely in fear and is therefore far more successful that one based in fear, like that of North Korea. Big Brother’s government instead gets its civilians to believer that it is a wonderful government that is all powerful and is constantly improving the condition of its citizens lives. In this way, its citizens have no need to uprise and are brainwashed into loving the government that they are governed by.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with @Lizette that in a perfect world, fear tactics would work because in that world, people would only be concerned with conformity and being quality citizens.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with both Grace and Alyceia that using fear Is one of the most effective ways to get someone to follow a certain guideline.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Antonio, that once fear is instated, it spreads very quickly. It can create messy issues and even eventually led to a form of rebellion in extreme situations.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree that a govt. run by fear cannot be stable.

# data[].attributes.body
A government can be stable if it is run by fear because they are too scared to rebel or try and change anything. I agree with Grace when she said that the people would want to conform to save themselves from harm.

# data[].attributes.body
Antonio's usage of 'spread like a wildfire' was a splendid simile. :)

# data[].attributes.body
I think fear is what makes us be stable. Not just as a government, but as human beings as well. It's why we have goals and dreams, and why we work towards things and create stability for ourselves, because we have that fear of not being anything, or being poor, or not being able to provide for your family, and I think the same goes for the government. The reason we have a stable government is because the government is scared of what would happen if we didn't have a government, or if the government wasn't stable, so I think that fear makes us be stable, not that we are based on fear, but that fear is what drives us.

# data[].attributes.body
Responding to @Evan's question about whether fear can create a stable government and my answer is no because at some point, fear will dissolve into something that people will stop caring about. If people always live in constant fear, eventually they are going to realize that there is no point to living if they can't feel safe. This will spark rebellion and ultimately the downfall of the government.

# data[].attributes.body
Responding to Evan's question, I do not believe a government based off of fear is stable because eventually the fear will annoy people so much that they rebel. A government that controls the people using trust is much longer lasting because people like trust. People like to feel safe; people don't like to be afraid. Dictatorships cause rebellion; democracies promote cooperation.

# data[].attributes.body
In a dictatorship, the people are at the hands of the dictator. This does not necessarily have to be negative, however it often is. People in a dictatorship will not have as many rights as a freed person but I do not believe they are puppets.

# data[].attributes.body
Responding to Blaze’s question. I do not think that the Brotherhood is sexist in nature. After all, Julia was participating in the discussion with Winston and O'Brien and considered as much of a member as  Winston was.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that even in a dictatorship, I don't really see how it's possible for the government to control your train of thought, even in a dictatorship you still have your free thoughts.

# data[].attributes.body
I think it would be possible to keep a population stable through fear. Being able to scare and force people into a certain way would be easy if they simply terrify them enough to get them to the point of not wanting to do anything else.

# data[].attributes.body
People in a dictatorship do have some freedoms. Even if the government is as strict as it is in 1984, the people can still think what they want as long as they outwardly show no sign of it. Even if there is a such thing as Thoughtcrime, no one can truly take away your thoughts.

# data[].attributes.body
If the brotherhood sexist in nature?

# data[].attributes.body
I do think Winston could have actually overthrown the government, but not in the way he did at all. He would have had to possess much more power, people, and motivation. Like Evan, I as well read the optional part in the book. I still think that it maybe could have been done in the right time and environment.

# data[].attributes.body
@Blaze's question, yes I think so to some degree because this society is very much one that sets roles to define what makes a good citizen and so there are some jobs that divide men and women.

# data[].attributes.body
Would you have joined the brotherhood if you could’ve?

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Valeria that the ending of the book makes it special. It makes the book a true dystopian book because in the end Winston ended up conforming

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Antonio but to a larger extent. Life as we know it is the most extreme form of conformity that we know. Sure North Korea is bad, but life as a whole is worse. To be human is to conform. To live is to be pushed into certain boundaries in which we are raised to be diligent workers. If you don’t believe me then why are we given an education, why do we work, and why do we live.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Sylvia that he was doomed from the beginning. As soon as he bought the diary he knew he was going to be killed. The reason he joined the brotherhood was because he wanted to make an even larger difference before his inevitable death.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Lizette, that in order to rebel, we must have a reason to rebel. Without a reason to rebel, this act will never get done. This reason can be small or large but without a reason rebellion would be non existence.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that even if he did overcome big brother a similar solution would arise in the end, he most likely would've realized that he loved big brother in the end or he would've regret it.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that since the citizens at least have freedom of thought, they are not puppets to the govt unless they choose to be.

# data[].attributes.body
I believed that Winston did have a chance of overcoming the party because I believed that O Brien was truly on Winston's side and I thought that somehow they could rile up the proles. Also, since O Brien was part of the inner party, I believed that he could help release some information that could bring the party down. On the other hand, I had suspicions that O Brien was just lying and deceiving Winston because he had the same level of intelligence as Winston and if he really wanted to bring the party down, he would have already done so.

# data[].attributes.body
To answer whether we live in everyday life in some sort of conformity, I would say that we definitely do. Simply not breaking the law is conforming to societal standards on a very basic level. Grooming oneself, participating in school and social activities are all forms of conforming. However, conforming in this way is not bad. It is when people start to conform without asking whether what they are conforming to is right that it becomes dangerous.

# data[].attributes.body
For somebody to transition into rebellion, it takes an epiphany and a breaking point. Something must happen in order to make a realization about how the way things are. It is an emotional and a physical state.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Antonio that is true that we all conform to an extent. If people never conformed to laws, society would not function. So many people so conform on a daily basis to school rules, traffic laws, etc.

# data[].attributes.body
We all live in some state of conformity because there rules that we are expected to follow and and places we are expected to be.

# data[].attributes.body
Yes, I do believe doublethink is possible. It is very common to have contrary beliefs in simple circumstances, such as Evan said. It is easy to understand and see both sides of a situation.

# data[].attributes.body
I think what causes some people to conform is the fear of not being apart of something and the fear of death, because in 1984 if you didn't conform you lived a very poor life and would most likely die, or have a smaller chance of staying alive than someone who does conform

# data[].attributes.body
winston made a big miss steak loving big brother

# data[].attributes.body
1. Yes, I do believe doublethink is possible. It is very common to have contrary beliefs in simple circumstances, such as Evan said. It is easy to understand and see both sides of a situation.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that people go from one side to the other simply because there isn't anything to fight for anymore

# data[].attributes.body
I agree wholeheartedly with Valeria that rebellion typically is taxing on your psyche generally, so once that burden begins to take too much of a toll, one may conform socially to fit in.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that people go from rebellion to conformity for one of two reasons. Either changes are made that satisfy the rebel enough to warrant that they don’t rebel or they realize that their rebellion is futile and decide to give up.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that everyone has a breaking point and for someone to change the ideals that they follow takes a lot of

# data[].attributes.body
I think it takes for someone to lose all the hope and everything they live for the go from rebelling to conformity. Winston has nothing to fight for because he lost Julia and any hope of successfully rebelling since O Brien betrayed him and the proles are no longer an option. I also agree with Evan because Winston realizes that there is no point in rebelling.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that once a person has completely lost all their will to fight for what they believe is when they finally give in and allow themselves to conform

# data[].attributes.body
Responding to Cassandra's question, I believe some form of torture like happened to Winston would change someone's rebellion into conformity. Once they reach that breaking point, they may succumb to conformity.

# data[].attributes.body
Everyone has a breaking point, and i believe that when a person hits that wall, they change. I agree with Alyceia that defeat can make someone give up hope

# data[].attributes.body
1. Yes, I do believe that doublethink is possible.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Valeria that coming to a compromise on two issues that seems to oppose each other is beneficial, but I do not agree that developing a nuanced stance on an issue is doublethink. It is just a more complex opinion.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Valeria, I didn't really think double-think was possible, but after hearing everyones opinions, I think that it is possible.

# data[].attributes.body
I think that doublethink exists in this society because the citizens are not given a choice in if it is possible for Oceania to be at war with Eurasia one second and Eastasia the next. The citizens must accept what they are fed and by not analyzing what they are fed to deeply, doublethink is possible although not truly believable.

# data[].attributes.body
I also agree with Evan, because I think his religion analogy was pretty on point with how I interpret double-think

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Evan that doublethink is possible to an extent. I think that this can be shown through many people in our current society who have contradictory beliefs and think contradictory thoughts at different times. There are very few people alive whose ideas are set in stone and impossible to change at any given moment.

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Evan that it is possibly to agree with both sides at the same time and that you are able to view and accept both sides

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Evan that double-think is plausible. However, I believe that double-think is plausible because because of the fact that if the mind is capable of doing it, which it are, then someone is falling susceptible to it daily.

# data[].attributes.body
I think double think is just a weird concept in general, I kinda agree with Antonio, I don't really understand how big brother would control double-think, but I get the concept

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Grace and Sylvia. After putting in an effort but seeing no change Winston lost his will to rebel.

# data[].attributes.body
dlkfjas;lkfjads;lkfjsdlkfjdw;jhl;dkfjadsl;jfdlfkjadslffhkdd;fkdjflskjdfkjfjfjdksjldlskjfslkjds

# data[].attributes.body
I agree with Evan when he said doublethink is more common in smaller ideas

# data[].attributes.body
I think that doublethink is not truly possible to genuinely believe because believing in two completely contradictory things with no reason can't be truly accepted or processed People can just accept it just because they have to, but it doesn't mean that they have to believe it.

# data[].attributes.body
Responding to the opening question, I do not think doublethink is possible. People may say that they believe two contrary things, but if they are directly contradictory, then they must side one way or another when they are genuine with themself. Otherwise they are just telling themself that they believe both ways to please their ego.

# data[].attributes.body
Big Miss Steak Mrs. Polasek. You've crossed me for the last time, watch your back

# data[].attributes.body
1. Yes, I do believe that doublethink is possible. Contrary beliefs are very common in simple circumstances, such as Evan said. Someone could understand and accept both sides.