John Locke On Equality, Toleration, and the
Atheist Exception
by Adalei Broers ( Political Science Graduate from City College in New York, NY).
This excerpt was taken from his article, John Locke On Equality, Toleration, and the
Atheist Exception. Student Pulse. The International Student Journal. 2009, Vol. 1 No. 12
- 3334 words
http://www.studentpulse.com/articles/75/2/john-locke-on-equality-toleration-and-theatheist-exception
Before there is a government and a nation, man lives in a state of nature where he
is guided by the laws of nature as God intended. Locke begins his Second Treatise
of Government establishing truths of nature mainly that God is the creator and he
did not grant superiority to any individuals in modern day society, as was often
argued in the past. Locke states, “In races of mankind and families of the world,
there remains not to one above another, the least pretense to be the eldest house”
(Locke, Treatise, 7). Here he discards the notion of royal or noble superiority
that reigned supreme in his day and, more importantly, he establishes general
equality of all. Thus the importance of equality comes from its existence in the
state of nature. The basis of the social contract lies in mutual consent, and man,
coming from a state of “perfect freedom” (Locke, Treatise, 8) and equality would
not be willing to settle for less when he leaves the state of nature.
Locke describes the state of nature as one “of equality, wherein all the power and
jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another; there being nothing
more evident, than that creature of the same species and rank, promiscuously born
to all the same advantages of nature, and the use of the same faculties, should also
be equal one amongst another without subordination or subjection” (Locke,
Treatise, 8). Because man is free and equal in the state of nature, he must be
assured that he will still be so when he enters society, thus for Locke the
establishment of the state occurs on the basis of assured equality without which
there would be no incentive to enter into society.
Equality is the driving force of Locke's political theory because it is the basis for
our consensual participation in society, a requisite for the establishment of any
state. As such, equality is not just necessary in the establishment of government
but is also a requisite in maintaining a safe and stable nation. Locke describes the
responsibility of the government (specifically the legislative power) as “the
preservation of the society, and of every person in it” (Locke, Treatise, 69),
showing his belief that the obligations of the government are to provide safety and
protection to all its citizens equally. Locke further articulates this point when he
discusses his view on slavery.
John Locke’s View on Slavery
To be enslaved is to be put “under the absolute, arbitrary power of another”
(Locke, Treatise, 17) which puts those involved into a ‘state of war’. His
definition of slavery is not traditional, particularly because of its connection to the
‘state of war’ which is one of “enmity, malice, violence and mutual destruction”
(Locke, Treatise, 15) for all involved which is in the disinterest of society and
contrary to the goals of the state. More importantly, “when the actual force is
over, the state of war ceases between those that are in society, and are equally on
both sides subjected to the fair determination of the law” (Locke, Treatise, 15). So
we see that for Locke, equality must exist in punishment as it does in protection, at
all levels of society, in all aspects of government.
It should also be noted that Locke’s interpretation of freedom and liberty are
directly associated with equality. In his discussion of slavery, Locke describes
freedom as “not to be subject to the inconstant, uncertain, unknown, arbitrary will
of another man” (Locke, Treatise, 17). This describes an equal distribution of
power. Liberty is described as the following; “my own will in all things, where
the rule prescribes not” (Locke, Treatise, 17). Both liberty and freedom only exist
in a state where they are applied evenly, or else they exist for a tyrant(s) in a state
of war. Most importantly, upon entering society individuals are required to
alienate a modicum of freedom and liberty, but full equality can (theoretically)
never be compromised.
John Locke’s view on Religious Toleration
In spite of legislation protecting each individual, conflict will inevitably erupt, if
not between a government and its people then among the people themselves. This
of course will impact the state and inevitably require response. It is in this
perspective that Locke writes A Letter Concerning Toleration, addressing the issue
of religious intolerance, a problem that permeated 17th century English society. He
was extremely critical of the fervent behavior of people concerning their religious
beliefs, particularly of those with “intemperate zeal” (Locke, Toleration, 9) who
would attempt to convert others to their faith.
He states; “That any man should think fit to cause another man — whose salvation
he heartily desires — to expire in torments, and that even in an unconverted state,
would, I confess, seem very strange to me, and I think, to any other also. But
nobody, surely, will ever believe that such a carriage can proceed from charity,
love, or goodwill” (Locke, Toleration, 2) Locke suspects that many missionaries
and evangelizing magistrates are doing so for personal gain.
Moreover, the violent tactics that were used and the punishments inflicted on those
unwilling to convert were wholly unchristian and would lead to a state of war
between the parties involved. Locke articulates this concern clearly in A Letter
Concerning Toleration when he says; “No one…neither single persons nor
churches, nay, nor even commonwealths, have any just title to invade the civil
rights or worldly goods of each other on pretence of religion. Those that are of
another opinion would do well to consider with themselves how pernicious a seed
of discord and war, how powerful a provocation to endless hatreds, rapines, and
slaughters they thereby furnish to mankind. No peace and security, no, not so
much as common friendship, can ever be established or preserved amongst men so
long as this opinion prevails, that dominion is founded in grace and that religion is
to be propagated by force of arms” (Locke, 8).
Locke is adamant in his criticism of religious fanaticism and forcefulness and goes
onto advocate a separation between Church and State; one of the first, if not the
first, modern philosophers to do so. In support of this severance he says; “I
esteem it above all things necessary to distinguish exactly the business of civil
government from that of religion and to settle the just bounds that lie between the
one and the other” (Locke, Toleration, 2). This philosophy is in fact the basis for
modern democracy and a cornerstone of the American constitution. The term
‘separation of Church and State’ was coined by Thomas Jefferson, who was
greatly influenced by Locke’s writings. Locke feared, as is still a concern today,
that without a clear distinction between the two, the care of the commonwealth
will be distorted by personal beliefs and will not be the priority, as it should
be. Every member of the commonwealth, regardless of affiliation, merits equality
under the law. Everyone that is, except for atheists, according to Locke.