18/11/2015
Stuart England Political Literature presentation
How does Locke justify a right to use force?
Content
-
The context of writing
A list of his major works
Epistemology
Political beliefs
How does this relate to violence?
Conclusions
Further areas which may be developed
The context of his writing
-
Life span, 1632-1704
The Succession Crisis 1679-1681
The 1688-89 Glorious revolutions
The 1688 Revolution, replaced James II by the Dutch William III, a revolution against Catholic
‘tendencies’ with the English monarchy
A response to Hobbes’ authoritarian contract theory?
But, could be considered as during the Restoration of Charles II crisis. An attempt to tackle
the ‘systemic problems’ within the Crown.
A list of his major works
-
-
The Reasonableness of Christianity, as Delivered in the Scriptures (1695)
o In which Locke’s concepts of God given commandments and natural law are
developed
An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690)
o Essay on epistemology. Tabula rasa.
Two treatises of Government (1690)
o The demolition of Filmer’s Patriarcha (1680) and the proper bases of political power
Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1693)
Letter Concerning Toleration (1689)
Excluded atheists and Catholics (due to their obedience to a foreign power)
Locke’s Epistemology
-
-
Knowledge:
o Three types are possible: Authority, innate ideas or senses.
o From senses, there are two: Simple or Complex.
o This is empiricism – all knowledge is derived from sense, therefore there it is not
possible to have knowledge that precedes observation
Tabula Rasa or Blank slate – written on by experience.
o There is no innate human nature
o Ergo we are all authors of our own Destiney
o All men are created equal.*
o Hence if you change the environment you can change behaviour.
Locke’s political beliefs
-
The pursuit of Life, Liberty and Property.
18/11/2015
-
-
Stuart England Political Literature presentation
State of nature and state of war.
o In Locke's state of nature, no person has control over another, natural law governs
and renders all people equal, and every individual holds the executive power of
natural law.
o State of War: "enmity and destruction" brought about by one person's premeditated attempts upon another's life. The law of self-preservation, integral to the
law of nature, dictates that a person may kill another person in self-defence.
Separation of powers.
Minimal government.
Property.
How do these relate to the right of violence?
-
What constitutes as an unjust act of violence, or inadequate use of it, is where an individual
threatens life of another or impedes their freedom.
Locke writes that force without adequate right of implementing it causes the State of War.
When in a state of war, one has the right not only to self-preservation but to attack.
Does this justify violence towards the monarchy? And what role does the context play within
this logic?
Conclusions
Further areas which may be developed
-
-
Like all things, definitions defines the logic of an argument and thus the conclusions reached.
Therefore, an intricate comparison of Hobbes and Locke’s definitions of the state of nature
and the state of war may be very interesting.
Does this view extend to his ‘lack’ of religious tolerance towards Catholics and Atheists?