The Boundaries Of Consent By Thomas Hobbes And John Locke Essay

Consent is defined by NHS Choices (2010) as: "the principle that a person must give

John Locke and Thomas Hobbes both believe that men are equal in the state of nature, but their individual opinions about equality lead them to propose fundamentally different methods of proper civil governance. Locke argues that the correct form of civil government should be concerned with the common good of the people, and defend the citizenry’s rights to life, health, liberty, and personal possessions. Hobbes argues that the proper form of civil government must have an overarching ruler governing the people in order to avoid the state of war. I agree with Locke’s argument because it is necessary for a civil government to properly care for its citizens, which in turn prevents the state of war from occurring in society. Locke also has a

Hobbes and Locke both abandoned the thought of the divine right of monarchy. Both did not agree with the fact that the ruler or assembly would have all power over its citizens. So basically they were against Absolutism and their views were that of rebels in their time period. Theses two philosophers both held similar ideas but also have conflicting ideas pertaining to the citizens "social contract" with their rulers, "Natural Condition of Mankind," and sovereignty.

According to sense two, legal or institutional effectiveness takes precedence. In other words, a subject’s consent is limited to the scope of the rules of the institution. Faden and Beauchamp illustrate that even if a patient autonomously gives her consent, it does not follow that effective consent is given if the requirements of the institution are not met. Consequently, the authors propose that sense one and sense two should both contribute in defining informed consent. Using Jay Katz’s argument, Faden and Beauchamp argue that sense two should satisfy sense one for there to be some type of balance between the two.

Consent can be delivered in a numerous amounts of ways. It can be provided verbally, in script, or implied by behaviour or actions(Ruth Townsend, 2014).

Over the length of this course, we have discussed several aspects of politics. We have studied citizenship and obligations to society as a citizen, justice and what it means to us as individuals, and how to go about enacting change within a community and around the world. Some of the most important topics from this class included the characteristics, duties, and obligations of rulers of government. In addition to the concept of rulers, we also studied the notion of authority and the moral and metaphysical implications of authority to individuals ' autonomy. Within each concept of study, we read works from many authors with conflicting ontologies, constructed from their differing views on human nature.

Tacit consent is a consent based on actions and not words, unlike express consent. An individual tacitly consents to the laws of a regime as long as the individual

James Madison strongly believed and supported increasing national power of government and that led him to establish his model known as Madison’s model. James Madison’s design to maximize liberty and still allow the government to govern is proven through the four component parts of Madison’s model. These four components include separation of powers, checks and balances, federalism, and republicanism. The philosophies of John Locke and Thomas Hobbes influenced Madison in a way that allowed him to have both liberty and order at the same time. John Locke believed in individual liberty and freedom from the government whilst Thomas Hobbes believed that the state of nature is that people are born selfish. These two philosophers managed to influence Madison because Madison wanted liberty but also wanted order and that was mentioned in Hobbes’s theory of a strong leader which provided order.

Consent is the informed agreement to an action and/or decision. Permission for something to happen or agreement to do something.

To understand political power aright, and derive it from its original, 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, within the bounds of the law of Nature, without asking leave or depending upon the will of any other man (...)

Kennan breaks moral responsibility down to two entities: government and individual. He argues, “Government is an agent, not a principal. Its primary obligation is to the interests of the national society it represents, not to the moral impulses that individual elements of that society may experience” (Kennan, 34). Kennan also argues that morality is only conceptually possible

Dimond (2009) and NHS choices (2016) explained consent as the process involving a person giving their approval to accept or refuse a treatment or interventions, after receiving detailed information from a health care professional about the risk or benefits of the procedure. In order for consent to be deemed valid, it needs to be given voluntarily without any influence or pressure from either a family member or clinician. In addition, the capacity of the person is important when giving consent and the ability to process the given information and make a decision. Tingle &Cribb (2014) agree, emphasizing that the autonomy of the person giving

Change is in the inevitable byproduct of society. As societies evolve they change according to the life style of the people who inhabit them. Without change, society would never progress and thus would be frozen in a single moment in time. Thomas Hobbes and John Lock were two English philosophers who observed tremendous changes in English politics between the years of 1640 and 1690. In closely examining the views of both of these philosophers in subject areas such as the nature of man in society, the relationship between a society and its government, and the affect that both philosophers’ novels had on the government, it can be concluded that both Hobbes and Locke’s philosophies created prominent change in the methods of government.

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are comparable in their basic political ideologies about man and their rights in the state of nature before they enter a civil society. Their political ideas are very much similar in that regard. The resemblance between Hobbes and Locke’s philosophies are based on a few characteristics of the state of nature and the state of man. Firstly, in the state of nature both Hobbes and Locke agree that all men are created equal, but their definitions of equality in the state of nature slightly differ. According to Locke, “…in the state of nature… no one has power over another…” Locke’s version or idea of equality in the state of

Consent must be clear and recognizable from other things and given in a comprehensive and effectively open frame, utilizing clear and plain language. It must be as simple to pull back assent as it is to allow it.