Examples Of John Locke And Tacit Consent

2354 Words5 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Genealogy of Morality

Chapter 1: Morality is not a science; it is an ever-changing view of what is right and wrong, good from bad throughout the course of human life. Science deals with facts, measures of values, where there are only “personal” opinions. Morality is subjective, where I don’t believe that there is such thing as moral facts. People disagree/ agree over ethical questions all the time, it is subjective matter. In a subjective matter, the speaker conveys feelings, where as in a scientific matter, the speaker would report facts (tested/proven). I feel that there are no moral facts for this exact reason, when we say something is wrong or right, we are expressing what our personal approval or disapproval may be, although their might be a common consensus, …show more content…

Whereas tacit consent is when you passive accept consent, for example, you don’t actually state your view or agreement in voice or writing to a certain situation, there is no objection. I believe that Locke’s position on tacit consent is enough to substantiate that humans have agreed to society’s rule and regulations, today as well. It was when he originally wrote his work, there were kings and queens, royals in which the people chose. The authority of the king was chosen from the “consent of the ruled”! In todays society, we have the same system, where those whom are born in this country/ fulfill certain requirements can vote for the leader of the free nation, the president. The people of the United States consented to the government, (or president in our case) and his powers when we vote for them. Locke’s position on tactic consent shows that individuals have agreed to live in a society where they are passive about the society in which they live, they still have individual rights within the sections that they live in. For us, rights and rules vary per state, but as it was the same in the 1500’s, there is still more “effective enforcement and protection” this

Show More
Related

  • Michael Gazzaniga Response To Universal Ethics Summary

    1557 Words  | 4 Pages

    In “Toward a Universal Ethics,” written by Michael Gazzaniga, a question is posed to coax his audience toward a science based ethics. “The question is, Do we have an innate moral sense as a species, and if so, can we recognize and accept it on it’s own terms? It is not a good idea to kill because it is not a good idea to kill, not because God or Allah or Buddha said it was not a good idea to kill.”(Gazzaniga, 420 para. 6). Gazzaniga answers the question for us, but he was wrong to assume that the brain’s systematic response to moral situations means that science should dictate ethics and morality. Instead, ethics and morality should be considered a part of humanity, which is influenced and balanced by many things including science, religion, and individual

    Read More

  • Compare And Contrast Locke And Absolutism

    716 Words  | 2 Pages

    The late sixteen-hundreds were a time of absolute monarchies, budding representative governments, and revolution (the Revolution in 1688 in particular). The people of this time, of course, had opinions about the ways things should be done and what kind of government should, and could, really work for the people. Even the idea of the government being a system that ultimately should work for the benefit of the people was a point of conflict in some circles. Two examples of men with strong opinions about absolutism were Bishop Jaques-Bénigne Bossuet, Louis XIV’s court preacher and tutor to Louis XIV’s son, and John Locke, arguably the most prominent English philosopher in his day. While Bossuet and Locke differed greatly in their views of what

    Read More

  • Mackie And Harman's Argument Analysis

    1606 Words  | 4 Pages

    Morality a part of ethics is a debatable topic. The study of ethics called metaethics deals with what morality is and deals with the scope of moral values. The debate in metaethics about morality is on the existence of moral facts. Philosophers have different perspective on morality and if it has a truth/false value like science does. Moral facts define morality as something that can have a truth value attached to it and thus there are principles governing what is moral and what is not. However, there are philosophers like J.L. Mackie and Gilbert Harman who do not believe in moral realism or that moral facts exist. Mackie believes in the second order moral subjectivism. He does not believe in the subjectivism that states that morality reports

    Read More

  • John Locke And Niccolo Machiavelli Research Paper

    1350 Words  | 3 Pages

    While history continues to be made everyday that goes by, we take a look at three famous philosophers to interpret their ideas. These philosophers include John Locke, Karl Marx, and Niccolo Machiavelli. They all have something in common, which is to observe and form an opinion on the human nature of people and how society works as a whole. Even though all three discuss about the same topic, their ideas are quite different from one another. While Locke and Marx place their opinions on human reasoning, Machiavelli does not. Each of their opinions derived from the actions that people make, such as Locke, who believes that all humans are created equal, Marx who believes that people are consciously good and will do the right thing to balance society, and Machiavelli on the other hand, who believes people are selfish and will act in accordance to their best interest.

    Read More

  • Locke And Machiavelli Research Paper

    1179 Words  | 3 Pages

    Locke and Marx put their trust in human reason while Machiavelli does not. These authors’ assumptions and different conceptions of human nature determine and lead to each of their conclusions regarding human nature. This paper will argue that Locke views human nature in a positive manner where humans are rational and reasonable. This paper will also argue that Marx denies the existence of human nature and instead concludes that social relations and society ultimately defines humans. Finally, this paper will argue that Machiavelli, unlike the other authors, has a negative understanding of humans as he thinks that man is selfish and that an individual should not be given too much power as they only act upon their own self-interest.

    Read More

  • Military Persuasive Essay

    1088 Words  | 3 Pages

    What is morality? Merriam-Webster dictionary states that morality is/are the beliefs about what right behavior is and what wrong behavior is

    Read More

  • Locke, Hobbes, Mill, Thoreau

    1432 Words  | 3 Pages

    For individual property to exist, there must be a means for individuals to appropriate the things around them. Locke starts out with the idea of the property of person; each person owns his or her own body, and all the labor that they perform with the body. When an individual adds their own labor, their own property, to a foreign object or good, that object becomes their own because they have added their labor. This appropriation of goods does not demand the consent of humankind in general, each person has license to appropriate things in this way by individual initiative.

    Read More

  • The Pros And Cons Of John Locke's Social Contract

    1054 Words  | 3 Pages

    For those who are familiar with John Locke’s social contract should remember that as an individual we give up certain freedoms that we see fit in order to protect our basic rights to life, liberty, and property. If an individual breaks this “contract” then why should they reape its protection. If someone violates the terms of a contract then they lose all that it entails. Why should it be any different in this situation. The individual has willing broken the contract and should suffer as anyone else would in this certain situation. By taking away the rights to life of someone else that person has forfeit their own. This means that they officially become the state 's property does it not? This is something to think of as it would completely change the system by which our criminals of a caliber as high as this would be tried. People that argue against this ask for a sympathetic role to which leads the question to,”To what are you appealing?” At this point they are already unable to contribute back to society. They are in a word a parasite leeching away at the life of those that follow the rules that they as a part of society have created and contribute to.

    Read More

  • Subjectivity Vs. Objectivity Morality

    1214 Words  | 3 Pages

    Well now that you understand what comes from subjective morality, let's look into objective. Objective morality is the view on life that there are rules in regards to morality, about a person's behavior. There are 2 ways you can come about these moral rules; religiously or scientifically. Let's first look at morals from a religious point of view. More specifically Christianity. The purpose of Christianity is to follow the teachings of Jesus, and obey what He says. Within this belief system God is ultimately good. And to be good you must become more like God. What are Gods attributes? Goodness, righteous hate, justice, knowledge, love, rationality, mercy, speech, truthfulness, and wisdom. We can see that if a person did these things we have a perfectly good person. Let's now take a step back. Addressing what evolution, and science has to say about objective morality. The ironic thing is one of the things evolutionists and Christians can agree on. That morality isn't subjective. As for the moment there is a developing theory on humans containing a moral gene. Previously within evolution it was always assumed parents and religious practices taught right from wrong. This was more of a subjective view. As of the last decade or so there has been new developments on digging deeper into where truly morality comes from. There have been multiple primatologists and biologists supposing a theory that morals have originated from our ancestors, and have been evolving over time. Do to the social behaviors of apes and other species. The apes showing empathy, and having essential mammal group behaviors. It translates into simplistic moral behaviors of apes. Nicholas Wade, a writer on psychological maters for The New York Times, spoke on such matters "Marc D. Hauser, a Harvard biologist, has built on this idea to propose that people are born with a moral grammar wired into their neural circuits by evolution." Wade

    Read More

  • The Idea of Consent in the Works of Locke and Rousseau

    1209 Words  | 3 Pages

    John Locke powerfully details the benefits of consent as a principle element of government, guaranteed by a social contract. Locke believes in the establishment of a social compact among people of a society that is unique in its ability to eliminate the state of nature. Locke feels the contract must end the state of nature agreeably because in the state of nature "every one has executive power of the law of nature"(742). This is a problem because men are then partial to their own cases and those of their friends and may become vindictive in punishments of enemies. Therefore, Locke maintains that a government must be established with the consent of all that will "restrain the partiality and violence of men"(744). People must agree to remove themselves from the punishing and judging processes and create impartiality in a government so that the true equality of men can be preserved. Without this unanimous consent to government as holder of executive power, men who attempt to establish absolute power will throw society into a state of war(745). The importance of freedom and security to man is the reason he gives consent to the government. He then protects himself from any one partial body from getting power over him.

    Read More

  • John Locke

    2446 Words  | 5 Pages

    John Locke's, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690), was first criticized by the philosopher and theologian, John Norris of Bemerton, in his "Cursory Reflections upon a Book Call'd, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding," and appended to his Christian Blessedness or Discourses upon the Beatitudes (1690). Norris's criticisms of Locke prompted three replies, which were only posthumously published. Locke has been viewed, historically, as the winner of this debate; however, new evidence has emerged which suggests that Norris's argument against the foundation of knowledge in sense-perception that the Essay advocated was a valid and worthy critique, which Locke did, in fact, take rather seriously. Charlotte Johnston's "Locke's Examination of Malebranche and John Norris" (1958), has been widely accepted as conclusively showing that Locke's replies were not philosophical, but rather personal in origin; her essay, however, overlooks critical facts that undermine her subjective analysis of Locke's stance in relation to Norris's criticisms of the Essay. This paper provides those facts, revealing the philosophical—not personal—impetus for Locke's replies.

    Read More

  • John Locke´s Flawless Government

    856 Words  | 2 Pages

    For John Locke in order to create an almost flawless form of government we must imagine a world without government. Without government we will retreat back into the state in which all men are naturally in, which Locke calls the state of nature. While in a state of nature, men would feel that they have complete freedom, and they won’t have to depend on any other man. Additionally, “the natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on earth and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but to have only the law of nature for his rule” (Dolling). So the law of nature governs the state of nature, and protects our fundamental rights. Furthermore, the execution of the law of nature is placed into the hands of every man. Under the law of nature every man has the right to punish another for any evil they commit against the law of nature. Despite man having the ability to freely do what they please while under the law of nature, their rights would unfortunately not be protected...

    Read More

  • What Makes Us Moral By Jeffrey Kluger

    928 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the article “What makes us moral” by Jeffrey Kluger, he describes how morality is defined and how the people follow rules. Kluger discusses about scientific research that has been done to point out the important reasons of morality. Kluger explains that a person’s decision to do something good or bad is based on empathy, that humans tend not to do bad to those they sympathize with. Kluger also compares humans with animals and thinks that morality is the only thing that separates us from animals. I do agree with Kluger that people are born with a sense of right and wrong, but we should be taught how to use it. We learned to be nicer to those around us because we already know the type of person they are, and the morality we learned as children

    Read More

  • John Locke's Natural Rights: Life, Liberty, And Property

    150 Words  | 1 Pages

    John Locke’s Natural Rights stated that all men have three rights they are born with: life, liberty, and property. The first right is life. When a person is created, they are given life. They have the freedom to do what they want with themselves. The next right is liberty. People are given liberty. When someone is born they are automatically given the liberty to move, breathe, talk, etc.; however, some liberty must be earned. The last right is property. While having property would make most people happy, some people may not be as satisfied. In the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson pulled these three main ideas from Locke and incorporated them into the document. While the life and liberty rights stayed the same, he altered the idea of

    Read More

  • The Philosophy of John Locke

    1230 Words  | 3 Pages

    Johnathan Robert’s life has been characterized by a keen ability to self teach. At two years old, he suffered an accident that broke his femur. Within weeks of his caste being removed, he relearned the skill of walking. At no older than six years old Johnathan had received numerous ear surgeries yet refused to allow his speech to reflect any of his hearing loss. By the age of seven, he had effectively taught himself how to read and write. According to the philosophy of John Locke, Johnathan’s knowledge did not come from innate ideas or principles, but rather from experiences and sensations. Although John Locke’s thoughts were monumental, flaws exist in the rejection of innate ideas.

    Read More

More about Examples Of John Locke And Tacit Consent

Open Document