Law v.s. Opinion Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1250 words

Law v.s. Opinion - seek ExampleBorn on August 1, of 1930, he recently passed away on January 23, 2002. His views embody the disciplines of umteen tenets including philosophy, literary theory, sociology, and anthropology. He is the protagonist of the world of sociological studies, and he opposed and debunked some of the most general antagonisms in the genre. His most popular work is Distinction A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. In the 1967 study, he interprets how members of the upper class define taste as an aesthetic. He finds that the public has no unfeigned representation in democratic societies.Pierre Bourdieu asserts that public panorama does not exist. This poses the question, how should we conceive public opinion If it is true that the public does not exist, than the real question is, whose opinion is public opinion Rational selection Theory poses that idea that human beings nervous strain their opinions and decisions based on collective observations and calcul ations. It also assumes all individuals are well informed of all of their options and that it is an inherent human tendency to think everyone makes decisions this way. If this is true, it would explain the blind cartel people have in public opinion. It is a faith so devout, it often sways and molds popular far-offming ideals. Pierre Bourdieu strongly negates this view. According to his perspective, if there is no public opinion then, the courts judge based on the whole according to the law, and their own personal judgment, which we perceive in compliance with an imaginary public. The constitution ends up having a very significant say in the lives of the people. This forces us to look at its core creation by the Federalists and the g everywherenment that has grown to live by it. The government we have today has come a large way since its creation by the Founding Fathers. With the new disappointments arising towards the current administration, many have begun to question and ass es the social function of the constitution structured by the Founding Fathers and how it still applies to us today. Some go so far as to suggest that the federalists who framed the constitution insisted on limited federal involvement, but the history of the States shows this is not the case. The Federalists protested limited government, while secretly creating a constitution that might one day form into an all powerful force. In fact, history shows that every official in any given government agency usually tends to take actions to increase the power of the government, whether state or federal, regardless of party classification. This is a traffic pattern specifically structured to maintain a minority class of wealthy elite to rule over the majority. The only difference between then and now is technological advancement and experience in the elitist tame of the masses. If it were not for the presence of these traits in American society, there would be no real physical budge to an alyze. In a sense, nothing has really changed money is still as much the emperor of our soil now, as it was then.Until the twentieth century both scholars and the public revered the Framers as demigods and canonized the Constitution as the crowning symbol of a democratic revolution against tyranny. However, the many publicized political and corporate scandals of the continuous tense Era in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries influenced historians to begin viewing the Constitutional