PLEASE HELP: To what extent do institutions emphasize conformity at the expense of individuality?

The following is an example of an opinion concerning the extent to which institutions emphasize conformity at the expense of individuality in the following manner:

Institutions exist with the purpose of organizing society, maintaining a certain order and preventing people from behaving in harmful ways to themselves and others.

However, their existence comes at an expense. When we allow institutions to govern our lives, we give them the power to tell us what to do and how to do it. And one thing that all institutions have in common is their demand that we conform to rules by letting go of our individuality.

When you belong to an institution (a school, an organization, a business, a church), you are told what to wear, when to arrive and when to go home, what to say or how to behave, etc. Even if you would like to act, dress, or think differently, you must conform to their rules in order to be a part of them.

In other words, the things we could do, say, or wear in order to express our tastes and preferences, that is, our individuality, are suppressed. To be seen as a respectable, functional member of that institution, we must leave aside what truly makes us ourselves.

Learn more about writing texts here:

link

Individuality refers to the quality of being unique and doing things in a way that isn't the same as the way most people do things.

Conformity, on the other hand, is when a person tries to blend in and behave in a certain way to fit into a particular standard. When a person conforms, he or she does not stand out from a crowd but rather blends in.

Institutions emphasize individuality, only if the individual does not go against the ethics or rules of the profession. It is much safer to conform and go with the trend in an institution because, that way, you would rarely go wrong.

With this in mind, an institution emphasizes conformity but is flexible with allowing talented people some room for individualism.

normally working animals are domesticated and ruled by a master, a domesticator (tamer), to perform basic and important functions on a farm, for example. the value used in this context is animal labor in exchange for food. it is not so much a contrast to the story told by napoleon and the pigs, since the animals of that particular farm also performed functions on the farm through domestication. the only thing is that in this case, who rules them is a pig, also an animal, but very respected, to whom the other animals lent him submission. that's about a strong relationship of dependency between animal and owner.

hello : o)

b. les encantan los juguetes nuevos

hope this ! : o)