An Examination of Locke’s Key Argument
Jakub Ferencik · 4 days ago · (Medium.com)
Locke was an important British philosopher of the 17th century. He contributed to
- our understanding of human nature (tabula rasa or “blank slate”),
- the study of knowledge (empirical method), and
- politics (large influence on the American Declaration of independence, its French counterpart Declaration of Rights of Man, and classical liberalism).
His influence is hard to underplay. In this blog post I will cover one of his key arguments for Life, Liberty, and Property.
Brief Housekeeping
Before I get into that … I will quickly do some housekeeping. I wanted to start a brief series about political philosophy covering key arguments of thinkers from John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, and many more.
I realize that a lot of work has already been done on these thinkers but I thought that Medium might need a little bit of a boost of political philosophy, so why not?
This series will be very short, however, and will seek to cover each thinker within 500 words. Let me know in the comments whether you find these beneficial!
So, let’s get into one of Locke’s most famous works, his Second Treatise of Government.
Life, Liberty, and Property
Inorder for Locke’s argument for life, liberty, and property in his Second Treatise of Government to be valid, he must first establish a number of premises.
Most importantly, he must validate that citizens naturally deserve the rights of life, liberty, and property, which is by no means a self-evident point as his writing suggests. If these rights are not self-evident and primarily upheld by states, as Hannah Arendt later argued, then his argument for life, liberty, and property falls apart.
Not only does Locke need to assume that these rights are natural and self-evident, but he must also defend our ability to reason about these rights. If reason is flawed, as it was deemed in Europe throughout most of Christendom ‒ from the writing of Augustine of Hippo until the writings of Thomas Aquinas, but even during the Protestant Reformation ‒ then Locke would not be able to validate his argument. Indeed, the inherent ability to reason is central to justifying the inherent goodness of the binding laws of the state of nature.
Therefore, the primary obligation citizens have to uphold in the state of nature is due to their ability to reason; in the words of Locke, the law “teaches anyone who takes the trouble to consult it.”
That is not to say that Locke believes that humankind is without faults. Instead, because of the “poor shape” humankind is in, it must sacrifice whatever “privileges” it found in the state of nature for what it can gain in society. Therefore, in any given polity, Locke assumes that this contract between the government and the people guarantees life, liberty, and property. This is how in a state of nature, legitimate power comes into force, according to Locke.
The obvious and necessary question, then, is why citizens would give up their freedom in the state of nature for the utilitarian subjugation they acquire in society? For Locke, the answer is “obvious.” In his words, yes, the state of nature can provide an “unrestricted right” to property or “possessions,” however, citizens are not “assured” that they will be able to keep them because of the possibility of “invasion by others.” Therefore, citizens have no other choice but to join society.
In Conclusion
Tosummarize, in order for Locke’s argument for life, liberty, and property to be valid, he must justify our self-evident claim to these rights. Furthermore, if reasoning is inherently flawed, then there is no purpose in discussing justifications for life, liberty, and property.
Therefore, Locke also assumes our natural ability to reason in order to defend the crux of his argument that defines classical liberalism.
Before you go…
? I love connecting with fellow thinkers. Find me on Twitter, Facebook, Goodreads, or Instagram.
ALSO, here’s a link to MY BOOK if you wish to purchase it! I appreciate the support.
I’d love it if you’d share the article on Facebook/TWITTER if you want your friends to benefit from it in some way at all.
Until next time, keep reflecting!
More from Jakub Ferencik
Author of “Up in the Air: Christianity, Atheism & the Global Problems of the 21st Century” on AMAZON | Exploring Ethical Living | IG: jakub.ferencik.official