Locke's Second Treatise of Government, by far, is his most influential and important piece of writing. In it he set forth his theory of natural law and natural right. He shows that there does exist a rational purpose to government, and one need not rely on "mysticism and mystery." Against anarchy, Locke saw his job as one who must defend government as an institution. Locke's object was to insist not only that the public welfare was the test of good government and the basis for properly imposing obligations on the citizens of a country, but also that the public welfare made government necessary.
Locke believed that the mind is blank upon birth. As a person grows and develops, so does their mind. He urged individuals to formulate theories and to test them through experiments. The fundamental claim is that human knowledge begins with sense experience and primarily is derived from it. Locke begins his philosophical examination of knowledge by trying to disprove the claim that some of our knowledge is original, in the sense that it comes from ideas which are innate or inborn. Locke's attempted refutation depends on a questionable assumption: if an individual has an idea, then that individual would understand it and assent to its content.
Also, Locke believed in religious freedom and the separation of church and state. He thought that God established divine law. This could be discovered by reasoning, and to disobey it was morally wrong. He also held the opinion that no one should dictate the form of another's religion. But Locke points out that there is widespread disagreement over the concept of God. Furthermore, it does not seem to be present at all in small children. We form ideas as the endpoint of the action of physical bodies on our own bodies. Locke points out that sometimes he uses 'idea' to refer to the end product, what exists in the mind, and sometimes he uses it to refer to the quality in the body which causes the idea. The ideas of sense are the first ideas we have. Once the mind begins to be populated with them, it can operate upon them.
Locke classified ideas as simple and complex. All complex ideas are said to be made up, ultimately of simple ideas, and their complexity is the work of the mind. A simple idea is "one uncompounded appearance," said Locke. But it should be noted that the relation of simple to complex ideas is not...
... middle of paper ...
...st of the members of the society. The government is given its power to act by the property owning portion of the population, not by the society as a whole.
Another point that makes Locke's theory different is that society has the power to overthrow the government. Since a majority created it, they have the power to remove it. Locke stated that society could overthrow the government without returning to the state of nature because the social contract would still be in effect. All that was needed would be for the society to elect another government, by majority rule, to replace the old one. This introduces the idea that government should be accountable to the people. Locke was in favor of a limited government.
The importance and autonomy of the individual in society was of very importance to Locke. The extent to which this was true is that people existed as individuals before societies and governments came into being. They each possessed certain rights, and all had the freedom to do as they pleased, unrestrained and with some restrictions placed upon them by God, according to Locke. This freedom of the individual was important, for it was the foundation for modern liberal democracy.
One of Locke’s largest points is "All ideas come from sensation or reflection” (Locke 101). He thinks that man is completely blank when they are born and that their basic senses are what gives them knowledge. Locke states, “Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper” (Locke 101). Locke is basically saying that human nature is like a blank slate, and how men experience life in their own ways is what makes them good or evil. Overall, Locke believes that any and all knowledge is only gained through life
In Second Treatise of Government John Locke characterizes the state of nature as one’s ability to live freely and abide solely to the laws of nature. Therefore, there is no such thing as private property, manmade laws, or a monarch. Locke continues to say that property is a communal commodity; where all humans have the right to own and work considering they consume in moderation without being wasteful. Civil and Political Societies are non-existent until one consents to the notion that they will adhere to the laws made by man, abide by the rules within the community, allow the ability to appoint men of power, and interact in the commerce circle for the sake of the populace. Locke goes further to state that this could be null in void if the governing body over extends their power for the gain of absolute rule. Here, Locke opens the conversation to one’s natural right to rebel against the governing body. I personally and whole heartily agree with Locke’s principles, his notion that all human beings have the natural right to freedoms and the authority to question their government on the basis that there civil liberties are being jeopardized.
Locke, John Essay concerning Humane Understanding, Book II ("Of Ideas"), Chapter 1 ("Of Ideas in General, and Their Original")
John Locke, an English philosophe, like many other philosophes of his time worked to improve society by advocating for the individual rights of people. John Locke strongly believed in more rights for the people and was against oppression. In his book, Second Treatise on Civil Government, Locke stated, “(W)e must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose [manage] of their possessions . . .” (Document A). Locke means every man is naturally equal, no one was created better and he has certain guaranteed rights. This helps society because it would deny a monarch to strip a person of their guaranteed rights and it would make the monarch less powerful and his/her power would be given to the people. The greatest change to government Locke states as necessary, “(W)hen the government is dissolved [ended], the people are at liberty to provide themselves, by erecting a new legislative [lawma...
We all watch these TV shows and we fall in love with them. Sometimes we even fall in love with the people in the show and binge watch the show just because we love the one character. Or we even have that one character that we loathe and wish was never on the show, but we still watch the show because you want to see what happens to the character we hate. For me, I absolutely love Gabriela Dawson from Chicago Fire and she watch that show every Tuesday night at 10/9c. On the other hand, I absolutely loathe Gemma Teller from Sons of Anarchy. Both these characters are strong women that do what they think is best for the people they love, however Gemma does it in a way that I do not agree with.
John Locke was an English philosopher who lived during 1632-1704. In political theory he was equally influential. Contradicting Hobbes, Locke maintained that the original state of nature was happy and characterized by reason and tolerance; all human beings were equal and free to pursue "life, health, liberty, and possessions." The state formed by the social contract was guided by the natural law, which guaranteed those inalienable rights. He set down the policy of checks and balances later followed in the U.S. Constitution; formulated the doctrine that revolution in some circumstances is not only a right but an obligation; and argued for broad religious freedom.
Locke used the arguments that a government is nothing if it is not supported by the power of its citizens. He argued that the citizens of the government were not well represented in the government so it was justified to be overthrown. This is what he thought about the overthrowing of King James of England in 1688. Locke argued that if the people in a country were to dissolve then the government in that country will also dissolve. He saw a country as a big group of people with similar views. He talks about how society decides to act as a whole group. When they split apart is when society becomes different groups and the government then falls. Many colonists were from England and witnessed or knew about the Glorious revolution and felt like they were mistreated the same way the people of England did at that time. Locke’s ideas played a major role in influencing the colonists to realize they were not being treated fairly and they had a right to fight for freedom to create their own
Lockes and Hobbes ideas of government differed greatly, Hobbes believed in an absolute government while Locke believed in a very limited one.Locke believed that people were naturally good and trustful and that they had the capacity to govern themselves. So the need of the government only came in the form of stopping any potential disputes that would occur. While Hobbes believed that humans were not all that good and their need for government stemmed from the fact that people cannot govern themselves. Furthermore Locke believed that the governments role was to listen to the people it was governing, a rule by consent. While Hobbes believed that the Government was to rule on it’s own and owed no answers or consent by the people. Moreover Locke believed that the purpose of the government was to protect the property and freedom of its people, while Hobbes believed that the governments role was to tell them what to do. But arguably the biggest difference between the philosophies is the notion of government accountability. Hobbes believed that the government had free reign to do what they please with no backlash, while Locke believed that if the social contract was broken then the people of the community had the right to revolt and over throw the government. To further this point Locke unlike Hobbes believed that leaders should
Review this essay John Locke – Second treatise, of civil government 1. First of all, John Locke reminds the reader from where the right of political power comes from. He expands the idea by saying, “we must consider what estate all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit.” Locke believes in equality among all people. Since every creature on earth was created by God, no one has advantages over another.
Locke believes that everyone is born as a blank slate. According to Locke there is no innate human nature but human nature is something we create. And because we are born as an equal blank slate all men have the opportunity to create human nature therefore Locke believed all men are created equal. Unlike Bentham Locke believed that government needed to take a step back and allow for each individual to have the right to three things: life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. The Governments role should not be in dictating people what to do but to allow individuals to their three
Locke’s Theory of knowledge against Descartes which he believes there are no such innate ideas. He explains that if the idea is truly in one’s mind then it must be understood and some humans do not understand these ideas. From his evident, the noncontradiction law, “it is impossible for the same thing to be, and not to be”. For example, I work or not work on the philosophy exam but I just can’t do both of them at the same time. He considers the innate ideas are too extreme for humans being to understand and therefore we should reject them. Another Locke’s argument is that if innate idea exists, then it must appear to our minds prior before the instruction. When he mentions about the minds of young children whic...
Our mind then processes that perception into an idea. A great example I can give is from my childhood. I was playing outside by my elderly neighbor and she said, “Stop,” and I did, which made her tell me I was very obedient. I didn’t know what that word meant so I looked it up and did not like the definition. Ever since that day I tried to not be obedient unless I wanted to be or absolutely needed to be. I heard something I didn’t know anything about, researched it and reflected on it and decided I didn’t want to be that. My experience makes me agree with Locke because I was able to process what happened to me and decide for
...tainly possessed these qualities of life even with all is idiosyncrasies Locke believed we were all created equal that this was “self-evident”. Locke’s’ reason was to abide by the laws of God as well as the government. He thought that we should be mindful of how we treat ourselves and others at all times for as long as we live. . As a result of Locke’s views, he established “New liberties that would be enshrined in civil, social, and political rights”. (Biblical Politics pg. 95) “Although Locke’s new political order left individuals free from subjection to authority and helped overcome gender and similar barriers to personal and social advancement, this order also became problematic: a new-found emphasis on reason ultimately led to a disruption in the human spirit and to new forms of social isolation”.( Biblical Politics pg. 95-96)
John Locke, Berkeley and Hume are all empiricist philosophers that believe in different things. They have things in common such as the three anchor points; The only source of genuine knowledge is sense experience, reason is an unreliable and inadequate route to knowledge unless it is grounded in the solid bedrock of sense experience and there is no evidence of innate ideas within the mind that are known from experience. The relationship between our thoughts and the world around us consisted of concepts which were developed from these philosophers. I have argued that Locke, Berkeley and Hume are three empiricists that have different believes.
A cause of the Vietnam War was a consequence of the Cold War. According to C.N. Trueman’s article The Causes of the Vietnam War, he states how the Soviet Union and United States could not risk going on an all-out nuclear war, so the Soviet Union helped arm countries in Southeast Asia, such as Vietnam, to reinforce communism. Also with China under communist regime, they provided to arming the North Vietnamese as well. During this time period, Ho Chi Minh was the leader of the communist government and with his tactics of guerilla warfare, he fought to keep Vietnam under his rule. Another cause leading to the war was when the French tried to reclaim the northern territory of Vietnam. As a result, Ho Chi Minh and the “Viet Minh”, which he calls his soldiers, plus the aid from communist China fought to keep Northern Vietnam under Minh’s rule. In the end, the French had to withdraw from the war in 1954, even with the aid from the United States, because there were too many casualties. At this point in time, Vietnam was divided into a North Vietnam lead by Ho Chi Minh and South Vietnam lead by President Ngo Diem Dinh. But that’s not the end of the war. Ho Chi Minh wanted to claim Vietnam for himself and have it under his communist rule, so he began militarizing his soldiers, which were known to be the “Viet Cong”. Diem was strongly against communism and had to defend the Southern part of the country with the allied help from