Study Guide 2

7 Pages
Unlock Document

Irving Zeitlin

L5 - Locke Disputes divinity of monarchy Defends right of peoples to revolt Perfect human nature founded on the Golden Rule - preservation of peace & equality. Authority vested in all to punish transgressors, proportional to crime committed. Those who have been personally damaged have the unique right to seek reparation. He does however concede that a civil government would be needed to ensure fair sentencing The State of Nature is thus contrasted with royal absolutism, as all are accountable to all He tries to differentiate Nature and War, arguing that War is when there is no common authority, but implicitly concedes that they may be one and the same, and that this is why Nature has been discontinued, and humanity has developed modern society complete with judicial authorities Freedom in Nature is not freedom unhinged it is freedom under common laws created by the government with the consent of all. Locke even states that one cannot willingly place himself under the absolute or arbitrary power of another, as humans lives are under Gods jurisdiction Justification of private property, insofar as appropriation does not entail theft or hoarding (Biblical) Derides the connection between King and Father: (1) Neglects role of mother, (2) Ignores temporary status of parents dominion, (3) Ignores accountability of parents to law Those under the authority of a Prince are in an even worse state than Nature, as they have no right to defend themselves from the arbitrary and cruel decisions of the Prince Even if a leader is wise, forthright, and morally exemplary, assurances against tyranny are needed. Legislative authority therefore must be separate from, and capable of checking, Executive authority The fact that primordial societies were mostly absolute monarchies is no defence of the institution; that is actually to be expected from inexperienced societies, ignorant of methods of checking power Locke disputes the notion that individuals are born under government and thus have no right to challenge it, citing the countless instances throughout history of people rising against their current governments to either (A) replace them, or (B) break away entirely to form new nations Where Hobbes believed separation of powers would inevitably birth factionalism, strife, and ultimately civil war, Locke supported separation, envisioning peaceful,
More Less

Related notes for SOC101Y1

Log In


Join OneClass

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

Sign up

Join to view


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.