Locke - The Social Contract
Here John Locke proposes some abstractions which are unique to the zeitgeist. Locke accepts to a degree that we are in a Hobbessian State of War without Laws and Rights.
He emphasizes the right of a man to rise up against his master forcing him to join him in a civil society. He argues against absolutism, not monarchialism of despotism.
Locke also points out that one has to be a master of his own life, not a lesser tyrant for this equation to work.
As seen from the final sentence, here in the United States, this war continues until this day. We have freedom from our government in degree that we condone the war it makes on our selves with our conscience participation.
He that is master of himself, and his own life, has a right too to the means of preserving it; so that as soon as compact enters, slavery ceases, and he so far quits his absolute power, and puts an end to the state of war, who enters into conditions with his captive.
Sect. 172.
Thirdly, Despotical power is an absolute, arbitrary power one man has over another, to take away his life, whenever he pleases. This is a power, which neither nature gives, for it has made no such distinction between one man and another; nor compact can convey: for man not having such an arbitrary power over his own life, cannot give another man such a power over it; but it is the effect only of forfeiture, which the aggressor makes of his own life, when he puts himself into the state of war with another: for having quitted reason, which God hath given to be the rule betwixt man and man, and the common bond whereby human kind is united into one fellowship and society; and having renounced the way of peace which that teaches, and made use of the force of war, to compass his unjust ends upon another, where he has no right; and so revolting from his own kind to that of beasts, by making force, which is their's, to be his rule of right, he renders himself liable to be destroyed by the injured person, and the rest of mankind, that will join with him in the execution of justice, as any other wild beast, or noxious brute, with whom mankind can have neither society nor security*. And thus captives, taken in a just and lawful war, and such only, are subject to a despotical power, which, as it arises not from compact, so neither is it capable of any, but is the state of war continued: for what compact can be made with a man that is not master of his own life? what condition can he perform? and if he be once allowed to be master of his own life, the despotical, arbitrary power of his master ceases. He that is master of himself, and his own life, has a right too to the means of preserving it; so that as soon as compact enters, slavery ceases, and he so far quits his absolute power, and puts an end to the state of war, who enters into conditions with his captive.
--(*Another copy corrected by Mr. Locke, has it thus, Noxious brute that is destructive to their being.)
technocrati tags:
Ethics
Homeland Security
Human Rights
Journalism
Krishna
Gaudiya Vaishnavism
Law
Logic
Political Philosophy
Political Science
He emphasizes the right of a man to rise up against his master forcing him to join him in a civil society. He argues against absolutism, not monarchialism of despotism.
Locke also points out that one has to be a master of his own life, not a lesser tyrant for this equation to work.
As seen from the final sentence, here in the United States, this war continues until this day. We have freedom from our government in degree that we condone the war it makes on our selves with our conscience participation.
He that is master of himself, and his own life, has a right too to the means of preserving it; so that as soon as compact enters, slavery ceases, and he so far quits his absolute power, and puts an end to the state of war, who enters into conditions with his captive.
Sect. 172.
Thirdly, Despotical power is an absolute, arbitrary power one man has over another, to take away his life, whenever he pleases. This is a power, which neither nature gives, for it has made no such distinction between one man and another; nor compact can convey: for man not having such an arbitrary power over his own life, cannot give another man such a power over it; but it is the effect only of forfeiture, which the aggressor makes of his own life, when he puts himself into the state of war with another: for having quitted reason, which God hath given to be the rule betwixt man and man, and the common bond whereby human kind is united into one fellowship and society; and having renounced the way of peace which that teaches, and made use of the force of war, to compass his unjust ends upon another, where he has no right; and so revolting from his own kind to that of beasts, by making force, which is their's, to be his rule of right, he renders himself liable to be destroyed by the injured person, and the rest of mankind, that will join with him in the execution of justice, as any other wild beast, or noxious brute, with whom mankind can have neither society nor security*. And thus captives, taken in a just and lawful war, and such only, are subject to a despotical power, which, as it arises not from compact, so neither is it capable of any, but is the state of war continued: for what compact can be made with a man that is not master of his own life? what condition can he perform? and if he be once allowed to be master of his own life, the despotical, arbitrary power of his master ceases. He that is master of himself, and his own life, has a right too to the means of preserving it; so that as soon as compact enters, slavery ceases, and he so far quits his absolute power, and puts an end to the state of war, who enters into conditions with his captive.
--(*Another copy corrected by Mr. Locke, has it thus, Noxious brute that is destructive to their being.)
technocrati tags:
Ethics
Homeland Security
Human Rights
Journalism
Krishna
Gaudiya Vaishnavism
Law
Logic
Political Philosophy
Political Science
posted by Kronin at 4:59 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home