In chapter IX of his Second Treatise of Government, John Locke initiates his interpretation of the ends of political society and government. He begins this discussion with two thought-provoking questions regarding the reasoning behind an individual voluntarily parting with natural liberty. This is a legitimate inquiry, considering once a man enters civil society he submits himself to certain laws and the people who make them. Although Locke does not view government as a natural state for human beings, he asserts that the state of nature lacks certain comforts that can only be achieved through a political society. Therefore, although man does enjoy certain powers within the state of nature, government is ultimately needed to ensure peaceful and comfortable living. This paper will analyze Locke’s interpretation of the ends of political society and government, by discussing the following: natural and civil liberty and the inadequacies in the state of nature. A government can only be established through the consent of those who are governed. When individuals consent to a …show more content…
The state of nature lacks three matters, which he distinguishes as the main motivations for seeking and establishing a new form of society. Firstly, the state of nature lacks an established, settled, and known law. In the state of nature, individuals are only governed by their own reason. Locke supports this idea in Chapter II when he states: Every one, as he is bound to preserve himself, and not to quit his station wilfully, so by the like reason, when his own preservation comes not in competition, ought he, as much as he can, to preserve the rest of mankind, and may not, unless it be to do justice on an offender, take away, or impair the life, or what tends to the preservation of the life, the liberty, health, limb, or goods of another (Locke,
Hobbes’ Leviathan and Locke’s Second Treatise of Government comprise critical works in the lexicon of political science theory. Both works expound on the origins and purpose of civil society and government. Hobbes’ and Locke’s writings center on the definition of the “state of nature” and the best means by which a society develops a systemic format from this beginning. The authors hold opposing views as to how man fits into the state of nature and the means by which a government should be formed and what type of government constitutes the best. This difference arises from different conceptions about human nature and “the state of nature”, a condition in which the human race
To Locke, the “State of Nature” is a state in which every human being is his own king, who answers to no higher authority than his own conscience and will. Although this “State of Nature” offers complete freedom; this freedom is accompanied by an amorphous mass of fears and insecurities that stem from devolution that Locke called the “State of War”. The “State of War” occurs when one individual tyrannizes another (either to enslave him or to take over his property) and the victim of this relationship rightfully decides to defend himself. In the “State of War” the tyrant tries to deprive the individual of the rights that he is naturally entitled to.
While reading the “The Second Treatise of Government,” you can notice and see that John Locke has a strong standing for civil rights as well as helping with the development of the Constitution of the United States. He states that the “consent of the governed,” is basically saying that communities are not put together by the divine right or ruled by. Paternal, familial, and political are types of powers that John Locke mentions that have all have unlike characteristics. He inspired others to believe in and want equal rights and democracy. John Locke talks about the state of nature, which basically states that no one has the power to be ruler of someone, as well as they are able to do what they want in a freely matter. In other words people are born just like anyone else that is born, and should have equally rights to property, health, and liberty, and that no one should have the power over anyone. Everyone should be able to live and enjoy his or her own freedom and wellbeing. However, the state of nature is not a guarantee to have natural laws, which could help with the protecting of one’s property. According to him having your own personal freedom was the true meaning of state of nature. John Locke thought that people were following his faith in human rationality through the declaration of Locke. John Locke states that if the government takes away from others for them to empower them then the people have right and opportunity to go against
John Locke’s social construct, which is inherently based on the The Law of Nature, bestowed by God, assuring humans with the right of health, liberty and property, is undoubtedly flawed to some extent in which specific aspects of such can be exploited to justify wrongful doings. Given that Locke forms that the human state of nature is one of relative peace, in which each person is inherently moral trough universal religious affiliation, and whom follow their bidding without interference, in regard to the rights bound by the law of nature, and the constant tendency for humans to develop disputes amongst these natural rights, specifically that of property, the attraction of swaying away from a state of nature is in part to maintain one’s property safe and equal. This is an important factor in Locke’s theory as it is what disputes the choice of staying in a peaceful state of nature in the menace of possible war and danger.
John Locke was an english philosopher who expressed his idea of civil governments. In the documents, John Locke expresses the idea on what a civil government is formed by. John Locke describes the beginning steps to achieving a political power which is the law of nature. In the law of nature, Locke expresses how men are all free to do as they please without the consent of another man. “We must consider what estate all men are naturally in, and this is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit, within the bounds of law of Nature, without asking leave of depending upon the will of any other man” (Documents 81)
Locke believed that man should not let any boundaries be set forth upon them against their recreation of their rights, however, within the limitations of the government and the safety of the people. Using Locke’s ideas the authors of the Declaration of Independence imitates his belief with “whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government…” . This statement is a powerful one to have in such a monumental document that the entire governmental system is based upon as it not only gives the people their individual rights, popular sovereignty, but also asserts their final
For most of human history people have been debating what is the appropriate nature of the relationship between the individual and society. Starting with the ancient Greek, most people thought that individuals should be subordinate to society. In the publication The Second Treatise of Government, John Locke was the first to promote individualism over society. Though his ideas were considered as liberal, now are embraced by many conservative. John Locke’s ideas are the basis of the American government and so it is important to keep America 's nature; the rights of life, liberty to own property, and the pursuit of happiness; at heart when creating laws.
Locke feels that this system of government is lacking in that the ruler has all control, and may not be stopped in abuses of power, which Locke fears. Humans beings decide to form a society out of the state of nature because there must be unity among men in order to protect one another, and so that they may punish offenders of the justice. Men do this under the rule of an indivdual who is selected by the people, and to whom the people give up some of their personal rights.Though humans give up certain rights to the chosen authoriy, they are entitled to certain rights reserved to them alone, which they hold within the society. All members of the society should be equal under the law of justice, and that no man is better than another, since all men are created equal, and all are equal before the laws of nature. The law of nature states that people attain property through the labour they do.The ruler or authority over a society should be an indivdual
To achieve this, in the state of nature, Locke argues that all one must do is to remove that which is to be appropriated from the common stock, for “[w]hatever then he removes out of the state that nature has provided and left it in, he has mixed his labor with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property.” [6] Having once “mixed his labor” with something and made it his own, others are hence excluded from all ownership.
Introduction Typically, the Second Treatise of Government written by John Locke delves into different concepts of individual rights and how those liberties are linked to the government and its policies. Locke starts by defining the natural state which focuses on the rights that a person has before a government intervenes. Locke’s argument is mainly based on the natural law which is effective when it empowers individuals to do what is right. Additionally, his ideas are based on the fact that people simply seek government intervention to protect their property. This essay analyzes Locke’s argument in the Second Treatise of Government on different aspects of government and law.
John Locke (1689) and Thomas Hobbes (2010) share a common underlying concern: establishing a social contract between the government and the governed. To be legitimate, government must rest in the final analysis on the “consent” of the governed, they maintain. They also share a common view of humanity as prone to selfishness (Morgan, 2011 p. 575-800). Given the modern era, Hobbes views of the state of nature and government seem antiquated; no longer do the masses wish to be subservient to anyone man without question. Lockean principals are now the base for today’s modern, just, prosperous and free states.
The original Social Contract tradition has had many authors, but for the purposes of this paper I will focus on John Locke’s work as one political system that might be used by a nation and the problems it entails that would have to be discussed for modern uses. Locke begins by describing a state of nature that entails equality and a state of perfect freedom for mankind to live as they want within the laws of nature (Locke 2009, 370). Locke’s work argues for his view of property, where a man has the right to the fruits of his labor but not to another man’s (Locke 2009, 372). In his view, the government is meant to prevent on man from seeking punishment that is unfit for the committed crime and that people join together for protection for themselves and their property (Locke 2009, 371-372). He argues also that no one man should be in charge and that a democracy should be used instead (Locke 2009, 371).
In the society illustrated by John Locke, the human nature is characterized as free and independent; however, the problem with society is that it has too many small inconveniences, which could be as trivial as a tree blocking the sidewalk. To solve these problems, a legitimate government, characterized by explicit consent, checks on institutions and the right to revolt by the people, is needed. The utmost legitimate government, in comparison to Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, is based on John Locke’s social contract in Second Treatise of Government because each aspect of a legitimate government protects the citizen’s life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Through each aspect, the people can actively participate in government to prevent the sovereign from taking advantage of their powers to further their own goals.
Locke regarded humans naturally in “a state of perfect freedom to order their actions” (Locke Two treatises ex.4). Along with this comes unbounded indulgence of the benefits of law of nature whereby men “has by nature a power, not only to preserve his property, that is, his life, liberty and estate, against the injuries and attempts of other men; but to judge of, and punish the breaches of that law in others” (Locke Two treatises ex.87). In addition, “it was not good for him to be alone, put him under strong obligations of necessity, convenience, and inclination to drive him into society” (Locke Two treatises ex.77). Locke views that the formation of government “derive[d] from God’s will” (Dunn 2003, p. 37) and originated from men’s need to protect their property as a collective, where a common
What makes a political authority legitimate? A legitimate political authority, in this essay, will be taken to mean that there is a justification for an individual or a body to have power over other people in determining such things as laws and protection of freedom. To consider this question, three theories shall be looked at – Hobbes’, Rousseau and finally Locke and determine which gives the most persuasive account of legitimate political authority. To begin with, their hypothetical starting point, the state of nature, shall be discussed to establish the foundations of their political authority. Secondly, the reasons that shall lead man to get out of the state of nature will be examined in order to see if these logically follow on from