Controversial Issues in BNW

Another controversial issue besides cloning and human reproduction that is highlighted in Brave New World is the question of whether technology hinders or helps the progression of the human race. In the world state, technology becomes such an overpowering role in society that it rules society and humans become controlled by technology rather than humans controlling the technology. "'Yes, everybody's happy now," echoed Lenina. They had heard the words repeated a hundred and fifty times every night for twelve years.'" (75). For instance, here we find the technology of Hipnopaeda controlling the citizens of the world state rather than helping them. Brave New World also arises various controversial philosophical issues. Huxley subtly sends questions such as "What is freedom?", "What is happiness", "Is life something that can be managed and maintained like machinery?" to the forefront by means of his story. Clearly Huxley's dystopia would not be so philosophically controversial if it weren't for its' various themes.

For instance, In the world state, the citizens all agree that they are happy and never hold opinions that conflict, however, Aristotle claimed in his Metaphysics: "If, however, all beliefs and appearances are true, then everything must be at the same time true and false. For many men hold opinions contrary to those of others and call deluded whoever does not think just as they do." "So, if everybody were sick or everybody insane and only two or three were well or sane, the latter would be thought sick and insane but not the majority."

As far as the issue of "What is happiness?" goes, in Huxley's World State, everyone is happy because they are predestined for what their role in society is. Aristotle claimed that happiness is the end in which men live their whole lives for; the end which they strive for, but he claimed that since "there are various actions, arts, and sciences, it follows that the ends are also various". Which means that although those in the World State may believe they are happy, they are in truth not, because they do not strive to attain their own happiness, but rather a happiness that stems from actions that they are predestined to do.

Utopia

In his Republic, Plato constructs his own utopia not so much on the foundation of fiction and exaggeration, as Aldous Huxley does, but rather on that of philosophy and logic and speaks of how an ideal state must be ruled by Philosopher Kings in order to thrive. I would agree with Plato's approach in that everyone in a utopia should be educated and wise, although I would not go so far as to say that the leaders of the utopia should be philosopher kings, but rather polymaths. If the leaders are polymaths then they would be well versed in all fields of knowledge, allowing them to answer questions from all fields of knowledge as well, allowing them to be the wises of leaders. The leaders would most definitely not be able to work in a dimension of unlimited power, but in similar restrictions to the citizens.

In my utopia, education would be promoted as often as companies who promote their products. Autodidacticism would be considered as a hobby to citizens, and video games would not be a popular form of entertainment. Citizens would travel by the most efficient transportation means possible, by magnetic trains and hydrogen-powered cars, and everything would be recyclable, resulting in a utopia not only considering all of the people that live under it, but considering Earth's role in harboring humans. Earth's genetic variety would bloom and all the obstructions that humans have caused the earth would be washed away. Earth at last would be a clean place to inhabit and humanity would live in its' modern world without causing any environmental issues.