Two Treatises Of John Locke

2578 Words6 Pages

John Locke, a distinguished political thinker, is widely known for his avocation of “natural rights”. However, it is usually overlooked in what context, and why John Locke was saying these words. In one of his works, Two Treatises of Government Locke explains just what he meant by “natural rights” and the interplay of these rights with a structured government. Locke’s piece is split into Treatise One and Two; the first ‘book’ is essentially a dissent that attacks Patriarcha, which advocates the idea of divine right of kings or ‘patriarchalism’. Book Two however, includes Locke’s ideas on the state of nature and how humans have natural rights to certain things. The amalgamation of these two books asserts John Locke’s theory on the way life should …show more content…

First, to understand any of Locke’s arguments it’s essential to know what exactly he means by the state of nature. In Locke’s terms the state of nature is “That is a state of perfect freedom of acting and disposing of their own possessions and persons as they think fit within the bounds of the law of nature”(Locke). The definition continues to state that people in this state are equal and all power is reciprocal amongst the people. However, one key fact to keep in mind is that Locke makes a point to distinguish although the natural state of humanity does not have an institutionalized form of government that doesn’t necessarily mean the community is lawless. However, in this state no one has the political authority to dictate onto others, but everyone has the right to justice and punish others for breaking the laws in the state of nature. This is due to “The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it” meaning no one has the right to harm another’s “life, health, liberty, or possessions”(Locke Ch. 1). This law of nature Locke put forth in order to prevent from what he calls a state of war, in which people experience aggression towards one and other and violate the laws of …show more content…

This is because Locke’s influence on American policy and laws. Although today, you don’t necessarily have to assert your own work onto a good to make it your own, even though that is true today. For example, this paper is my inherent good, because the thoughts are my labor on to this piece of paper. Therefore by adding my thoughts to the paper, the paper becomes my property. However, I disagree with Locke’s theory on excess. This comes from my personal bias because my environment is one that thrives on the unlimited wants of materialistic goods. So to think about just living with the bare minimum without having to seems foolish to

Open Document