Rousseau and Locke - CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS FOUNDATION

At this point some of the Country Party leaders began plotting anarmed insurrection which, had it come off, would have begun with theassassination of Charles and his brother on their way back to Londonfrom the races at Newmarket. The chances of such a rising occurringwere not as good as the plotters supposed. Memories of the turmoil ofthe civil war were still relatively fresh. Eventually Shaftesbury, whowas moving from safe house to safe house, gave up and fled to Hollandin November 1682. He died there in January 1683. Locke stayed inEngland until the Rye House Plot (named after the house from which theplotters were to fire upon the King and his brother) was discovered inJune of 1683. Locke left for the West country to put his affairs inorder the very week the plot was revealed to the government and bySeptember he was in exile in Holland.[]

Rousseau and Locke - Constitutional Rights Foundation

JOHN LOCKE and the NATURAL LAW and NATURAL RIGHTS TRADITION Steven Forde, University of North Texas

John Locke (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Locke's theory of the state of nature will thus be tied closely to histheory of natural law, since the latter defines the rights of personsand their status as free and equal persons. The stronger the groundsfor accepting Locke's characterization of people as free, equal, andindependent, the more helpful the state of nature becomes as a devicefor representing people. Still, it is important to remember that noneof these interpretations claims that Locke's state of nature isonly a thought experiment, in the way Kant and Rawls arenormally thought to use the concept. Locke did not respond to theargument “where have there ever been people in such astate” by saying it did not matter since it was only a thoughtexperiment. Instead, he argued that there are and have been people inthe state of nature. (Two Treatises 2.14) It seems importantto him that at least some governments have actually been formed in theway he suggests. How much it matters whether they have been or notwill be discussed below under the topic of consent, since the centralquestion is whether a good government can be legitimate even if itdoes not have the actual consent of the people who live under it;hypothetical contract and actual contract theories will tend to answerthis question differently.

SparkNotes: Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government

At the beginning of An Essay Concerning Human UnderstandingLocke says that since his purpose is “to enquire into theOriginal, Certainty and Extant of human knowledge, together with thegrounds and degrees of Belief, Opinion and Assent” he is goingto begin with ideas—the materials out of which knowledge isconstructed. His first task is to “enquire into the Original ofthese Ideas…and the ways whereby the Understanding comes to befurnished with them” (I. 1. 3. p. 44). The role of Book I of theEssay is to make the case that being innate is not a way inwhich the understanding is furnished with principles and ideas. Locketreats innateness as an empirical hypothesis and argues that there isno good evidence to support it.

John Locke’s Second Treatise of Civil Government - Jim

A final question concerns the status of those property rights acquiredin the state of nature after civil society has come into being. Itseems clear that at the very least Locke allows taxation to take placeby the consent of the majority rather than requiring unanimous consent(2.140). Nozick takes Locke to be a libertarian, with the governmenthaving no right to take property to use for the common good withoutthe consent of the property owner. On his interpretation, the majoritymay only tax at the rate needed to allow the government tosuccessfully protect property rights. At the other extreme, Tullythinks that, by the time government is formed, land is already scarceand so the initial holdings of the state of nature are no longer validand thus are no constraint on governmental action. Waldron's view isin between these, acknowledging that property rights are among therights from the state of nature that continue to constrain thegovernment, but seeing the legislature as having the power tointerpret what natural law requires in this matter in a fairlysubstantial way.

Election | Definition of Election by Merriam-Webster

There have been some attempts to find a compromise between thesepositions. Michael Zuckert’s version of the Straussian positionacknowledges more differences between Hobbes and Locke. Zuckert stillquestions the sincerity of Locke’s theism, but thinks that Lockedoes develop a position that grounds property rights in the fact thathuman beings own themselves, something Hobbes denied. Adam Seagravehas gone a step further. He argues that the contradiction betweenLocke’s claim that human beings are owned by God and that humanbeings own themselves is only apparent. Based on passages fromLocke’s other writings (especially the Essay Concnerning HumanUnderstanding) In the passages about divine ownership, Locke isspeaking about humanity as a whole, while in the passages aboutself-ownership he is taking about individual human beings with thecapacity for property ownership. God created human beings who arecapable of having property rights with respect to one another on thebasis of owning their labor. Both of them emphasize differencesbetween Locke's use of natural rights and the earlier tradition ofnatural law.

John Locke was born in 1632 in Wrighton, Somerset

Having set forth the general machinery of how simple and complex ideasof substances, modes, relations and so forth are derived fromsensation and reflection Locke also explains how a variety ofparticular kinds of ideas, such as the ideas of solidity, number,space, time, power, identity, and moral relations arise from sensationand reflection. Several of these are of particular interest. Locke’schapter on power giving rise to a discussion of free will andvoluntary action. (See the entry on .)Locke also made a number of interesting claims in the philosophy ofmind. He suggested, for example, that for all we know, God could aseasily add the powers of perception and thought to matter organized inthe right way as he could add those powers to an immaterial substancewhich would then be joined to matter organized in the right way. Hisaccount of personal identity in II. xxvii was revolutionary. Both of these topics and related ones are treated in the supplementarydocument: