
- •How does Locke define state of nature? How does it look like? Is it similar or different than that of Hobbes’ (II, 4)?
- •What are the three basic features (laws) of Locke’s state of nature? Locke’s law of nature vs. Hobbes’ rights of nature.
- •How does Locke balance our right to self-preservation with the same right of others (II, 6)? Shall we risk our life to help others?
- •What is the executive power in the state of nature? Who has that power and how is it exercised (II, 7)
- •State of nature versus state of war: how does Locke define both (III, 19)?
- •Who are those who violate the natural law in the state of nature? Are they human or not (III, 11)?
- •Who is the one who attempts to impose on us his arbitrary power? How should we treat such a ruler (III, 17)?
- •What is the origin of private property? Are there any limitations on private property in state of nature? (V, 25)
- •Are others poorer if we privatize that which used to be a communal property? What is the role of money? (V, 27, 36)?
- •How does Locke define (explain) slavery? Does the master have the power of life and death over the slave? What is the nature of relations between the master and slave (IV, 22)?
- •What is the nature of parental authority? Is it similar to public authority or not (V, 58-73)?
- •Why do the people leave state of nature (VII)? Are we solitary beings or political animals? Compare Aristotle and Locke in this respect
- •Is marriage permanent or not for Locke?
- •How do we enter into social contract, and what kind of government do we create (IV, 22)? How does he justify the rule of the majority?
- •Does the law of nature have its power in civil society or not? In what conditions can we act in civil society as if we were in the state of nature?
Does the law of nature have its power in civil society or not? In what conditions can we act in civil society as if we were in the state of nature?
Yes. Because all laws in civil society are based on natural laws.
Civil society requires giving up natural right to punish:
Because no political society can be, nor subsist, without having in itself the power to preserve the property, and... punish the offences of all those in that society; there, and there only is political society, where every one of the members hath quitted this natural power, resigned it up into the hands of the community... And thus... the community comes to be umpire
That�s why �those who have no such appeal� to a common arbiter �are still in the state of nature�.
�88. 2 powers of government:
a. power of making laws (LEGISLATIVE)
b. power of war and peace (EXECUTIVE)
�all this for the preservation of the property of all the members of that society, as far as is possible�
Who has the right to elect representatives? Does Locke give it to all people?
Возникает вопрос, что происходит с теми, кто не имеет собственности? Для чего они передают свои естественные права? По какой причине они тоже согласны быть членами гражданского общества? Каков их интерес? Ответ достаточно разочаровывающий. Локк на самом деле никогда не планировал и не ожидал, что люди без собственности будут играть какую-то роль в гражданском обществе. В рамках функционирования такой системы люди без собственности остаются без привилегий, однако они продолжают находиться под защитой закона, что тоже важно.
But governments understand that one does not automatically become a citizen of a state by being born in its dominion:
They claim no power over the son, because of that they had over the father�.� If a subject of England have a child by an English woman in France, whose subject is he?� Not the king of England�s; for he must have leave to be admitted to the privileges of it; nor the king of France�s; for how then has his father a liberty to bring him away?
� It is plain then, by the practices of governments themselves, as well as by the law of right reason, that a child is born a subject of no country or government.� He is under his father�s tuition and authority, till he comes to age of discretion; and then he is a freeman, at liberty what government he will put himself under, what body politic he will unite himself to[�118]
�119. �Tacit vs Express CONSENT:
Every man, that hath any possessions, or enjoyment, of any part of the dominions of any government, doth thereby give his tacit consent, and is as far forth obliged to obedience to the laws of that government, during such enjoyment� whether it be barely traveling freely on the highway.
BUT:
The obligation any one is under, by virtue of such enjoyment, to submit to the government, begins and ends with the enjoyment [of the property] [�121]
BUT, if you give express consent, you are irrevocably joined to that government.� In contrast,
Submitting to the laws of any country, living quietly, and enjoying privileges and protection under them [i.e. tacit consent], makes not a man a member of that society � Nothing can make any man so, but his actually entering into it by positive engagement, and express promise and compact.
Locke, Second Treatise of Government
“Men living together according to reason, without government, with authority to judge between them is properly the state of nature.”
“Force, or design of force upon another, where there is no government to appeal to for a relief, is the state of war.”
“Compact is an agreement for a limited power on the one side and obedience on the other side.”