Class Notes (836,580)
Canada (509,856)
Philosophy (1,299)
Lecture 5

W5L4.docx

4 Pages
149 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Philosophy
Course
Philosophy 2200F/G
Professor
Charles Middleton
Semester
Summer

Description
Week 5 Lect 4  In the SON you have no appeal process to which you can enact justice for yourself  Hobbes – motivation behind our escape from the SON is our desire to seek peace, notion of collective good for each individual  Individualist motivation drives us to escape the SON desire to protect property  Civil Society through the social contract (united power of something over everyone). Common superior to everyone, we are all equal with regard to our right to judge against the laws of nature, because of this equality in judging that respective break is in want of a common judge that is superior to the individual person  Civil society is this united power concentrated into a social procedural system that has authorization to adjudicate for everyone else  Give up SON when we entire into civil society, we give up common equality when we enter into civil government in a quest for the common superior  What motivates the move is to protect our property, we naturally have the desire or tendency to agree to the promises that we make  The property class stands the most to gain from social arrangements, our equality is preserved when we enter into the social contract, everyone has property for Locke, we own our own labor and that is property for Locke  The more property you have the more incentive you have to enter into civil society so that it can protect your property  Absolute monarchy can’t be a united power over everyone because not everyone in that society would then be equal, because the monarch has to be able to stand above everyone else.  The monarch can take your property, then that individual will have no one to appeal to if they feel they have been unfairly treated  Locke isn’t particular about form of government the only restriction is that whatever it is, it cannot be absolute. Aka no absolute monarchy or oligarchyIf you’re poor there is a chance you will be better off in the SON because civil society is aimed at promoting the individuals acquisition and protection of wealth  Whenever two people are in a relationship with no common power above them then those people are in the SON – where everyone is equal to everyone else in regards to their judicial capacity  Hobbes says we don’t have to worry too much about the monarch because by granting absolute power to a monarch there is no reason to think that that would be corrupt, that absolute power doesn’t corrupt at all says Hobbes  Locke absolute power corrupts absolutely , history has told us this – given enough time that person won’t be consistent in the regard to ruling ethically (a moral monarch) SON AND MONARCHY  Enact a legislature that is only temporary, that is dissolved before they can evolve into ruling for their own interest  There is no difference in extended parliament and absolute monarchy – dissolved parliament is when you can expect politicians to act in the interest of everyone  The supreme authorization for power comes from the majority for Hobbes and Locke. H is absolute power, L is divided amongst laws separated by the division of powers for people and the limitation of the laws - most common held view between H and L, sovereignty must be authorized by the people or the majority either implicitly or explicitly, not divinely proclaimed  H and L agree on liberty and equality  H equality leads to diffidence or distrust of others, liberty or what we’re free to do is a situation where we are licensed to do whatever we want  L we’re free in the SON but the SON is not a state of licence only liberty – as property of God no one has the right to harm anyone else unjustly  For Hobbes, liberty and license is the same thing. We give them up when we sign onto the social contract. We give up our freedom to submit to the sovereign, liberty y that we sacrifice. We submit to the power of someone but that someone exists in the SON, the commonwealth itself, the power relationships between people remain the same.  For Locke, we give up our equality when we leave the SON, that the commonwealth is understood or defined as a subordination to the common superior, something which can adjudicate disputes , this is the essence of a commonwealth  Within the commonwealth remains a state of equality, it is our liberty that we give up  Locke says that the sovereignty is held by the people or perhaps God (God is the sovereign over everyone) disputes between individuals can be decided by appealing to God, we need a human adjudicator. We are poor judges because we are slaves to our desire, all we need to solve this is an unbiased public judge  Not overriding the things that are held inalienably in the SON for Locke, whatever the form of that sovereignty, the fact that it must be limited and divided into branches of gov.  Limitations on popular sovereignty is in the form of the constitutions that delineate branches of government – limited sovereignty of the majority for how the branches of government is formed however so individuals cannot vote out the constitution  Division of that sovereignty is between the executive (enforces and maintains and executes the law) and the b
More Less

Related notes for Philosophy 2200F/G

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit