The fundamental assumptions about human nature have played a major role in determining the philosophy of life for many people. In fact, the manner in which various societies are organized politically, socially as well as economically has a great dependence on basic assumptions on human nature. There are diverse theories on how societies are organized based on assumptions towards human nature. Actually, all these theories are composed of assumptions on the preferences of human beings. There are various complex problems facing the modern world and whose solutions solely reside in the assumptions that are made by policy makers concerning human nature. The assumptions on human nature have elicited diverse reactions and views from different people (Rifkin 2009). As such, people have had varied preferences on the best and acceptable form of governance for their societies. The world leaders apply different forms of governance depending on the assumptions they hold towards human nature.
Governance based on human nature assumptions is an ancient principle spanning over 200 years ago. As a matter of fact, assumptions on human behavior can be traced to the enlightenment period (Turner 2006). This is the time when the concept of modern market was born and also the emergence of a state era nation. During the period of enlightenment, various thinkers such as the John Locke, Marquis de Condorcet, Adam Smith and other philosophers had their indignation on the views expressed by the Christian faith of the medieval period that human nature was depraved and fallen. Similarly, the same faith viewed humans as seeking the grace of God for salvation in the world to come. Consequently, these philosophers sought to believe that human nature contained autonomy, rationality, as well as utilitarianism. Moreover, they proposed that human nature obtained salvation in the material acquisition obtained during their lifetime.
The enlightenment thought pattern has had immense impacts on people’s perception of human nature and their preferred nation-state. The main focus of the nation state is the protection of property as well as the maintenance of citizen interests in all endeavors. Based on assumptions on the autonomy of human beings, nation states have been created. Thus the need for material acquisition and attainment of salvation to human nature has brought about the perpetuation of economic activities (Rifkin 2009). For instance, most of the modern nations embrace the view of human autonomy and search for individual growth. On the other hand, assumptions that human nature is dependent on the supernatural beings may bring about a form of governance that vests powers and privileges on a chosen intermediary. Such governments include the all-powerful monarchies which represent the divine will in governance.
Positive assumptions on human nature can promote effective governance. The modern society regards individual success and advancement with high esteem. Such assumptions make it justifiable for self governance (Turner 2006). The government is therefore justified to maintain the rules and regulations aimed at maintaining the agreed order. In spite of the shortcomings found in any form of governance, remarkable improvements can be done by embracing proper and correct assumptions on human nature. Additionally, immense success in governance can be attained through the embrace of new generation style of leadership. For instance, with the increased internal interrelationships, it is imperative for the government to take into account the biosphere politics which is a collaborative functioning of nations, regions as well as localities all embedded by similar governance and demands.
The federal government has the overall power and authority over all agencies. In fact, the federal government mandates the state offices to perform specific tasks in accordance to the requirements of their formation and governance. On their own, the federal agencies may not perform effectively. They derive all authority and power from the constitutional Acts that led to their formation and governance. Most importantly, there are essential requirements for the operation of the state agencies within such Acts (Ducat 2008). Therefore, the extent to which the federal agencies act and make rules and regulations is dependent upon the legality of the mandate by the federal government. The Supreme Court is mandated by the constitution to oversee all the legal activities of the federal government alongside the different federal agencies. As such, the regulations and rules applied by the agencies need to obtain approval of the Supreme Court. Moreover, there cannot be rules and regulations on how Federal agencies are to be rum without a nod from the Supreme Court (Ducat 2008). The entire process is supposed to be carried out through consultation with the federal constitutional requirements.
The federal agencies are regarded as being independent regulatory offices. The functioning of the various Federal agencies and offices is facilitated by the congressional financial appropriation towards such agencies. Consequently, the relevance of the rules and regulations made by these agencies has to be determined by the congressional as well as constitutional requirements. The enforcement of the rules and regulations made by the Federal agencies in the Courts as laws has to dependent solely on the requirements of the Constitution (United States Office of Education 2010). For instance, an agency such as the Federal Communications Commission was formed by the Communications Act of 1934 and it enjoys its independence based on the Federal constitutional requirements. Moreover, the agency boasts of immense power and authority to make rules and regulations within its constitutional requirements. The powers and responsibilities of the commissioners mandated to govern these Agencies are clearly enumerated in the Acts. For example in the case of the FCC, there are various titles of the 1934 Act on its formation that enlist different requirements of the agency. In fact, the first Title gives the description of the administration, formation as well as powers of the FCC. The Act also clarifies the process of selection and hiring of the commissioners charged with the responsibility of manning the Commission (United States Office of Education 2010).
The applicability and constitutionality of the rules and regulations made by Federal agencies and offices into laws in the courts depends on the Act on their formation. For example, the Acts tend to give a general functioning of the Agencies and their formation. However, there are specific issues that are left for the agencies to accomplish. Therefore, when the agencies narrow down the requirements of their formation, they are required to come up with rules and regulations on their functioning (Ducat 2008). Such rules and regulations need to be recognized by the courts. Nevertheless, the courts may fail to recognize such rules and regulations as laws under some conditions such as violation of certain federal laws or when the agencies act beyond their constitutional requirements.
Section B: essay no. 1
The debate on human nature and governance has had diverse discussions and propositions from several philosophers. For instance, philosophers such as John Locke and Friedrich Nietzsche have had diverse ideas and focus towards human nature (Andrew 1999). The two philosophers have delved in various areas of interest depending on the circumstances during their time and the preferences of their studies. Nevertheless, there are pertinent issues that tend to classify their works based on human nature. Moreover, these philosophers were interested in understanding the working of the society with man as the main center of focus.
From the perspective presented by John Locke, there are various factors that make human beings equal irrespective of the circumstances that entangle them. According to John Locke, there are various factors that bring about differences in views on religion and other issues in life. However, it is crucial that the differences are addressed in such a way as to promote better and harmonious relations among all men (Rifkin 2009). Furthermore, John Locke admits the existence of diversified views about religion and ways of life with each type claiming originality and superiority of beliefs. However, John Locke defends the importance of embracing tolerance towards the diversified views. Similarly, Locke proposed the importance of shunning the transmission of personal views and beliefs by elected representatives and embracing independence. Thus for him, human equity need to be the guiding principle for the maintenance of a civil society that enables human beings to thrive on individual basis.
On the contrary, Friedrich Nietzsche’s perception of human beings on inequality is based on his immediate circumstances and beliefs. In fact, the views presented by Nietzsche about human beings leaves a lot to be desired. For instance, the claim that illusion tend to satisfy human intellect in most of the time shows how diabolical his views are. Similarly, Nietzsche dismisses the existence of rationality among men as the guide into truth (Andrew 1999). Surprisingly, he makes a proposition that deception forms the basis of human beliefs. The harsh presentation of human nature by Nietzsche does not reveal the true nature of man. For instance, the claims in Nietzsche’s perspective seem distorted and presenting a negative view on life in general and human beings in particular. On the other hand, Locke’s views tend to place major importance on human capability and potential of self-determination. Locke’s perspective presents a true account of man and his pursuit of better end.