Introduction
The debate of Edmund Burke and Thomas Paine regarding the human nature and psychology is of great interest due to the opposing views presented by both the experts. The human nature debate of these two experts is of critical importance in forming the pillars of a society. The government policies are based on similar concepts related to human nature and actions.
Analysis of the Debate
Edmund Burke was a famous individualist. As per his point of view, a reason is individual’s reason and an interest is the private interest. His individualism was combined with his belief regarding natural sociability of man. According to him, man can’t be enemy of man; however, due to false government system, sometimes, it may happen. The obfuscation of mind of man would be in the interest of aristocrats, kings or the priests. However, obfuscation should be dissipated, as done in the past and it was ceased to consider that man is enemy of man.
This school of thought should be eradicated. There are remedies for omission of this act. One of the remedies is to throw or reject the government false system which is being held in everywhere, but in France and America in order to establish true system .
The government is not necessarily providing the rules essential for civilization of society and if providing in few cases are conveniently not competent. True principles are rules for society must be circulated by the government. One thing is to be noted about the government which is nationwide association on rules and principals of the society. The principles assist in regulating the rights of human and their obligation towards them.
These rules and principles are mainly based on the interests of both individual and government. But it has been reviewed by most of the researchers and analysts of this field that due to wickedness of men, they usually not take long view and enlighten their interests by their own. The reasons of a man to be an enemy of other are many in nature. Some of the important reasons are arrogance and short term greed which lead men to attack on rights and interest of other men and hence violate the principles.
It then becomes mandatory for the society. Otherwise the society could function as self-amendable free market, in order to become an association nationwide to protect the right of every man. As per theory presented by Paine, the rights are the main origin and also final cause of the government to exist.
A radical reorientation is required as a substantive alternative of modern soul. Culture thrusts to look forward even if all the things are in current to the culture. It is to be aimed high and pursuance of change is needed. Although it should be remembered that there are ways of existence of life and seek gratitude, satisfaction and patience instead of discontent, constant boring and impatience.
In these circumstances willingness is desired in order to preserve instead of tear down. The reforms, suggested by Burke, would be more cautious than the radical. Attention should be paid in formation of reforms regarding tried and the familiar .
One of the basic functions of the government among many others is to protect the community by providing their rights. The prosperous governments are supposed to act as per the principles formulated to protect the rights of the human beings. There are certain functions which have been divided to be performed by either government or society. In the context of rights’ protection, if performed by government, then society will complete the rest.
The man’s rights which are to be preserved by the government are original, natural and equivalent. These rights, as in manner of Burke, cannot be demarcated by the precedents drained from the antiquity. For stopping the previous rule and implementing the rule of the present day cannot be justified, which has not been justified in the history of hundreds or thousands years ago. We will have to go back whole way, till the divine origin of man’s right from the creation.
The rights of the man would be those which have been endowed by the God to the man as ‘a man’ at beginning. However, it is unanimously agreed by all the creations on a point of equity and original unity of the mankind. Therefore, it is evaluated that every generation has equal rights as to the generations preceded to it, and bears the same rule that everybody is born with equal rights as compared to the present or preceding one.
Thomas Paine was a famous Deity who believed on only one specific religious truth, that is the God’s existence. He believed that the God’s existence should clearly be known from the event of creation. As per his political theory, the God has functions but the main one is to endow the man with provision of imprescriptible and natural rights. In the perspective of Paine’s school of thoughts, there was none human perfection, supernatural or natural, no similarity in this created world and no divine design in the history.
According to Paine, the man should have natural rights with reasons that could be recognized. A man in needed all the rights and obligations just to build a good society. As per point of views of Paine, there is no moral order naturally for man directing him to moral rational ends. Paine thought that the duties are assigned in order to esteem the rights of the others. Therefore, he replied on the critics given by French Declaration of the Rights accompanied by declaration of the duties. It is the fact the declaration of rights means the declaration of duties. Whatever the right of mine is the right of other too, and it would be the responsibility to guarantee and possess as well. All the rights are their beginning and the end .
According to Burke, individual reason of the human is limited in its accomplishment and this limit the human being to radical individualism. Burke is of the view that the politics might by adjusted to human matter but not to the human reasoning, by which reason may be a part only but not the greatest part. Burke also was led by this skepticism to mistrust the possibility of ruling technocratic elite. This is due to the reasons that for Burke, none of the individual has the capability to overcome imperfection and radical infirmity of man. None of the person is able to it, irrespective of intellect or grip of the rules of science or fact of the nature .
It is thought that the need is logical and essential; therefore, few natural rights must be revolved into the civil rights. As per thinking of Paine, the natural rights can be defined the rights which are related to man with his existence. For instance, rights of mind, intellectual rights and action by individual for his satisfaction, happiness and comfort (not distressing natural rights of others) are classified as natural rights. Civil rights, on the other hand, are those which a man is provided with as a society’s member .
In the case of Paine, it is debated that several assumptions have been made regarding human freedom and nature’s knowledge, and is understood in a specific way. Some of the famous social contract theorists were followed by the Paine, among the famous were; John Locke, T Hobbes and Jean Jacques. As per their point of views, the reasons of man’s like state of the nature can be known and the rights he owns in that state. They argued that these rights then can be utilized as baseline for judgment pertaining to any law’s justice and political arrangement’s legitimacy. The political philosophy of the Paine reveals that the individual can becomes basis for social relationship, the obligations are binding only and the choices become supreme, if the individual selects to bind by a judgment rationally.
Burke, however, forms his political and moral philosophy around the obligations which are not chosen but binding nevertheless. A significant portion of Burk’s point of view becomes clear based on the fundamental character and facts of procreation of the human. Similarly, significant portion of worldview of Paine becomes clear on the basis of evinces liberated from those facts’ implications.
Conclusion
The social contract’s concepts were broadly utilized by Burke. He, however, the meaning have been changed by the contract social theorists including Paine. He reframed it as revolution in France as the social cataract is a partnership not restricted to those only living but also for those who are died and yet to be born. This has a slight variation than the concept given by Paine.
As per Paine’s point of view in this regards, living are not bound with the dead, and only few obligation to pass on to the progeny in order to maintain social and familial structure, provided the obligation restricts the choice of individual. Skepticism and Epistemological humility is maintained by the Burke; therefore he is skeptical, about knowing how to achieve the individual reason. There arises an issue with both Burke and Paine’s school of thoughts. Burke had issue with radical individualism of idea given by Paine, which elaborates that truth should be demonstrable to normal individual.
This discussion is associated with the authority and by these discussions and deliberations many of the present debates have become understandable. Burke considered the human being an entity surrounded with numbers of obligations which are needed to shape our lives.
Works Cited
Corey, Elizabeth. "Being at Home in the World: Burke, Paine, and Modern Politics." 30 January 2014. http://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2014/01/11962/. 02 December 2014.
Rieley, Shaun. "The Great Debate: Burke vs. Paine." n.d. http://www.theimaginativeconservative.org/2014/07/great-debate-burke-paine-book-review.html. 03 December 2014.
"THE BURKE-PAINE CONTROVERSY." n.d. http://www.mmisi.org/pr/06_01/canavan.pdf. 04 December 2014.
