Locke, Aristotle and Aquinas Essay

The writings of John Locke were basic in the idea that they focused on the natural rights of people, the rights given by God. Locke had theories when it came to religious tolerance. Locke believed that earthly judges, the state in particular, and human beings generally, cannot dependably evaluate the truth-claims of competing religious standpoints. InA Letter Concerning Toleration, Locke argues for freedom of religion, which became one of the bedrock principles which the country was founded on.

John Locke was perhaps one of the most influential political philosophers of the modern period. In the Second Treatise of Government, John Locke discusses the move from a state of nature and perfect freedom to a then governed society in which authority is given to a legislative and executive power. His major ideas included liberalism and capitalism, state of nature, state of war and the desire to protect one’s property.

     Aquinas’ third way argument states that there has to be something that must exist, which is most likely God. He starts his argument by saying not everything must exist, because things are born and die every single day. By stating this we can jump to the conclusion that if everything need not exist then there would have been a time where there was nothing. But, he goes on, if there was a time when there was nothing, then nothing would exist even today, because something cannot come from nothing. However, our observations tell us that something does exist, therefore there is something that must exist, and Aquinas says that something is God.

Karl Marx and John Locke both formulated philosophical theories that worked to convince people of their rights to freedom and power; however, they had conflicting viewpoints on the idea of private property. Locke felt that property belonged to whoever put their labor into it, and one could accumulate as much property as he or she wants (692). Marx, however, considered the private property of the select few who possessed it to be the product of the exploitation of the working class (1118). Personally, I believe that Locke’s conception of private property is more convincing than Marx’s point of view.

1) God is transcendent in that he is above and separate from the universe; He is holy and righteous. God desires us to pursue to know him, which is essentially impossible. We cannot conceivably come to comprehend God or experience Him personally. He is unknown and unknowable.

The foundations of law have been set in the ideas of natural laws that are given to us. There are many different theories on how our laws of nature have brought us to develop the social contracts and government of today’s society. John Locke and Saint Thomas Aquinas’s views of how social contracts are developed from natural and eternal laws are both well seated in the belief of God given rights, but differ in the politics of the governments.

With the exception of Native Americans, there is no race of people that originated in America. Yet today, we all come together under the colors of red, white and blue, sing the National Anthem and call ourselves "Americans". Despite our differences in religion, norms, values, national origins, our pasts, and our creeds, we all combine under one common denominator. Alain Locke addresses this issue of cultural pluralism in his article, "Who and What is `Negro'?" In this article, Locke states that, "There is, in brief, no `The Negro'. " By this, he means that blacks are not a uniform and unchanging body of people. He emphasizes that we, as Americans, need to mentally mature to a point where we do not view

When looking at the Declaration of Independence and the justifications which Jefferson used in order to encourage the dissolve of the ties between the United Colonies and Great Britain, it becomes apparent how much of the theories of John Locke that Jefferson used as the basis for his argument. Focusing particularly on the second paragraph of the Declaration, the arguments for the equality of each man and the formation and destruction of governments come almost directly from Locke's Second Treatise of Government. The other arguments in the Declaration of Independence deal primarily with each citizen's rights and the natural freedoms of all men, two areas that Locke also spent

John Locke, Berkeley and Hume are all empiricist philosophers. They all have many different believes, but agree on 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. Each of these philosophers developed some of the most fascinating conceptions of the relationships between our thoughts and the world around us. I will argue that Locke, Berkeley and Hume are three empiricists that have different beliefs.

One parent says that 'Normal teenage stuff' is not a good enough excuse. And that suicide and depression is not a thing from years past. As a precaution students don't get the first through fourth amendment. When does flirting become a real problem? MeShelle Locke, 16, of Lacey, Wash. On Nov. 5, she was kidding around with a boy in English class at North Thurston High. He made some wisecrack to the teacher, and Locke looked at him, made a gun with her thumb and index finger, and said, "Bang." The boy, whom she often joked with, wondered if it was a threat. "No," MeShelle said lightly, "it's a promise." You would have thought she had pulled a .357 Magnum. Some girls confronted her about the "incident," and an exasperated Locke made the same

Socrates once said, “As for me, all I know is that I know nothing.” Several philosophers contradicted Socrates’ outlook and believed that true knowledge was in fact attainable. This epistemological view however had several stances to it, as philosophers held different beliefs in regards to the derivation of true knowledge. Rationalists believed that the mind was the source of true knowledge, while in Empiricism, true knowledge derived from the senses. Rene Descartes, a rationalist, and John Locke, an empiricist, were prime examples of epistemologists who were seen to differentiate greatly within each of their philosophies. However, although Descartes and Locke’s ideas did contrast in that sense,

One of the most important branches in philosophy, is Epistemology, which means, theory of knowledge. So far, philosophers have made many attempts to discover the source of knowledge, the standards or criteria by which we can judge the reliability of knowledge. We tend to be satisfied with think what we know about almost everything, even though sometimes we are shocked to discover that something that we thought it was sure and certain, is instead proved dubious and not sure. For example, suppose that one person that you know and trust tells you that the moon landing in 1969 is only a lie, and the pictures and film were made in a laboratory. We might distrust our friend maybe or think that in fact there were no prove

1.) Thomas Aquinas believes that humans are born with a clean slate in a state of potency and acquire knowledge through sense experiences by abstraction of the phantasms. His view on how man acquires knowledge rejects Plato’s theory that humans are born with innate species. Along with Plato’s theory of humans understanding corporeal things through innate species, Aquinas also rejects Plato’s theory that in being born with innate species, humans spend their lives recollecting their knowledge.

First point of Locke’s is the government cannot use its power to force religious conversion. By doing this Locke sets limits on the government power with the church. Therefore people won’t be threatened to be forced to convert, instead they are able to believe freely in what they want as long as it is within the law. By doing this religion is able to be within the government as well as long as they don’t try to force people to convert into their beliefs. Second point of Locke’s is the true persuasion of a person cannot be forced upon a person. However the government can use arguments to defend their own specific religion or faith. So while the government is able to promote its own beliefs it cannot force its belief on anyone that does not follow their faith. They also cannot teach you about their faith, you shouldn’t trust what they have to say instead do your own research on the matter. Which brings me to my third point of Locke’s, the

John Locke was one of the first philosophers out of many who protested about government not giving the people the freedom that they deserve. As we know Locke and Hobbes are great thinkers, however they had divergent belief in the way they see the human. Throughout Locke’s life, he had various sublime ideas which tells that the power of monarchy (Kings) and monarchs should be limited and they should respect the rights of their citizens. Locke’s implicitly refuted the idea that Kings rule people according to the divine right, and defended that the human being should have the natural rights. For Locke’s believes people deserve freedom, though there were rules that was implemented, it shouldn’t be strict to have an order society. An example in a class, having a terror professor will gives nervous breakdown feeling to student because of being very strict rule. Then result, some of the students will be afraid to give their opinion freely, or some might drop their subjects to this professor. So how can this professor produce a very organized and productive class if his/her students were frightened by his strict rules. Unlike having a professor who have minimize rules but got sense of humor the students will feel at ease to share their ideas and they will be courage to pursue more their studies for better future. Locke also says that if the monarchy or the government fails to resect people's natural rights the people are allowed throw away the people who are responsible for