What did Thomas Jefferson and John Locke both write defenses for
This book considers the context of the colonial policies of Britain, John Locke's contribution to them, and the importance of these ideas in his theory of property. It also reconsiders the debate about Locke's influence in America, challenging a number of other interpretations. The book breaks new ground in its interpretation of Locke's writings about the Amerindians and English colonisation of America—a subject largely overlooked in the past. The book argues that Locke's theory of property must be understood in connection with the philosopher's political concerns, as part of his endeavour to justify the colonialist policies of Lord Shaftesbury's cabinet, with which he was personally associated. The book maintains that traditional scholarship has failed to do justice to Locke by ignoring the implications of contemporary British imperial policy for the interpretation of his political thought. The book offers insight into Locke's theory of property, suggesting a solution to the problem of why Locke himself assigned such importance to property in the state of nature being based on labour while at the same time asserting that property in civil society is based on convention.
John Locke created theNatural Rights of Man, ..
Thus, although he shared his generation's prejudice against "enthusiastic" expressions of religious fervor, Locke officially defended a broad toleration of divergent views.
For all for the attaining an , being limited by that end, whenever that is manifestly neglected, or opposed, the must necessarily be , and the Power devolve into the hands of those that gave it, who may place it anew where they shall think best for their safety and security.John Locke, , §149, 1690John Locke is the most important modern political philosopher, even if not now the most popular one, as we shall see.
John Locke and America: The Defence of English Colonialism
In the century before Locke, the language of natural rights alsogained prominence through the writings of such thinkers as Grotius,Hobbes, and Pufendorf. Whereas natural law emphasized duties, naturalrights normally emphasized privileges or claims to which an individualwas entitled. There is considerable disagreement as to how thesefactors are to be understood in relation to each other in Locke'stheory. Leo Strauss, and many of his followers, take rights to beparamount, going so far as to portray Locke's position as essentiallysimilar to that of Hobbes. They point out that Locke defended ahedonist theory of human motivation (Essay 2.20) and claimthat he must agree with Hobbes about the essentially self-interestednature of human beings. Locke, they claim, recognizes natural lawobligations only in those situations where our own preservation is notin conflict, further emphasizing that our right to preserve ourselvestrumps any duties we may have.
John Locke’s Theory of Property: Problems of Interpretation
[, §19]Among the disabilities of the State of Nature, Locke sees, not only defects in the ability to protect person and property, but an essential flaw in the application of justice.
John Locke: The Great-Grandfather of Our Country | …
Locke was born in Wrington to Puritan parents of modest means. Hisfather was a country lawyer who served in a cavalry company on thePuritan side in the early stages of the English civil war. Hisfather’s commander, Alexander Popham, became the local MP, and it washis patronage which allowed the young John Locke to gain an excellenteducation. In 1647 Locke went to Westminster School in London.