Ngiang Hui Min Kally A0162455E PS2258 October 2, 2017 1. Explain the difference between (a) the “agonistic” or tragic view of politics and (b) the “measurement and management” view of politics using the Antigone and Aristotle’s Politics as your resources. “Agonistic” or tragic view of politics describe a situation in which any method of resolving a conflict will lead to a tragic end. The “measurement and management” is when the leaders need to seek the greatest satisfaction or the least bad option when they are presented with two competing rights (lecture 2, Aug 25, 2017). The key difference between these two views on politics is that the “agonistic” view is more pessimistic, while the “measurement and management” view is more optimistic …show more content…
All three of these factions tried to claim a space for their mode of practicing Christianity and are willing to use arms against the other groups in order to defend themselves (lecture 3). Due to this existing conflict, Locke proposed the separation of the Church and the state with the combination of religious toleration in order to restrict their power as well as eliminate the rise of other religious factions (evidence). Locke believes that religion and the state have different duties, thus, you can’t combine them into a state religion (evidence). (Evidence) He states that the state exists to ensure civil goods (i.e. properties for people to live their life and the liberty to live life as one sees fit). Laws and actions can only address problem of liberty and properties and cannot touch on matters of faith (evidence). The only time the state can interfere with religion is when that religion denied the property and liberty of others in society (lecture 3). Thus, religion becomes individualistic because it is matter of personal conviction rather than a belief that is forced upon someone from external pressure. Joining a church has also become a voluntary action (evidence), where individuals only associate themselves with a church if they are willing to practice their belief together. This result in the state becoming a guarantor of this open field of practice, where they would only take action against any religion that tried to suppress the other religion. Locke further proposes the idea of radical toleration, in which all may practice their religion to the extent that they tolerate the practice of other religions (lecture 3); a solution Locke believes can thwart religious wars because he believe that a religion that coerce people into believing it is no longer a
In discussing freedom of religion in this case, the key principles at odds are free exercise clause versus the establishment clause. In determining, the establishment clause one needs to consider both the participants and location of
This main theme of Founding Faith: How Our Founding Fathers Forged a Radical New Approach to Religious Liberty by Steven Waldman covers the simple proposition of, “Rebellion to Tyrants is Obedience to God.” At the conception of the new royal colony, founders had supreme ideas to flee an oppressive established religion of king and country. Waldman states, “The Pilgrims were Puritans who had become ‘Separatists’ because they believed that the Church of England was so corruptly entangled with Catholicism that nothing short of a clean break would suffice” (p. 7). As time progressed important men believing that America was a “Christian nation” stepped to center stage (p. 71).
Throughout history, many concepts that started off as controversial soon became accepted norms that have been adopted as standard practice. One such idea is the separation of church and state. In many modern-day countries, this separation is not a belief that looks to be accepted anytime in the near future. Most countries in the Middle East still have no desire to take the religious influence out of their governmental rules. This was also the case in the American colonies prior to the signing of the Declaration of Independence in 1776.
Additionally, his view of equality makes a better case based on the fact that it was not inadequate to the political realm. Locke also emphasized on religious toleration except atheism. Moreover, he also supported the general toleration of religious beliefs and at the same time remained pessimistic with the ex-communication of non-believers. Locke's political and religious understanding of life played an essential role in influencing his understanding of equality (Broers 1). In this case, these things put in the picture his moral code and also give details of the seemingly opposing ideas of his thinking.
Ch7 Freedom of Conscience, Roger Williams, and Alan Johnson begin with a completely revived inspection of the early historical period of which all accept today as accurate American history, dissecting the concept of church and state separation in our governmental system. We can delve into an exploratory perspective of Williams’ informative presentation to the reader as a dialogue that reveals that long before James Madison and Thomas Jefferson argued for a distinct barrier of separation between church and state for youthful America. New England, 17th-century, minister Roger Williams sets forth a staggering proposition in freedom of conscience, for all believers in Christianity, or not, with political inclusions for pre-dated convictions by
" Taxation is, in essence, a very strong assertion of control by a sovereign over its subjects. Exempting churches is a way to ensure that the state cannot control
" Some legislative actions associated to religion has been acknowledged legitimate by the Supreme Court. For example, implementing
Locke's most important and influential political writings are contained in his Two Treatises on Government. The first treatise is concerned almost exclusively with refuting the argument that political authority was derived from religious authority. The second treatise contains Locke’s own constructive view of the aims and justification for civil government. According to Locke, the State of Nature, the natural condition of mankind, is a state of perfect and complete liberty to conduct one's life as one best sees fit, free from the interference of others. This does not mean, however, that it is a state of license: one is not free to do anything at all one pleases, or even anything that one judges to be in one’s interest.
Like most things that are society based, religion has evolved alongside our own culture. America is a melting pot of different ethnic backgrounds and cultures making it a perfect place for religion to adapt and flourish. For this analysis, I am drawing from “Civil Religion in America” by Robert N. Bellah (1967) on his ideas of American civil religion. In the text Bellah (1967) argues that civil religion is an important dimension that needs to be recognized in sociology. While Bellah focuses specifically on the United States of America, he still gives a valuable perspective on civil religion and how it plays a part in religion as a whole.
In accordance with the First Amendment, “free exercise” means a freedom to practice any religion, including less mainstream ones and no religion at all ("What Does "free exercise" of Religion Mean under the First Amendment?").The government is also forbidden to establish state churches or to refer one religion over another. However, once again, despite the fact that all the religions are under protection, they still be under one up to that moment when they become dangerous for the society on the whole, and to its professors, in
Religious Freedom Remains Alive and Well For many years there has been significant discussion surrounding religious freedom and politics relating to the state or the government. At times they are distinct and separate from one another, yet at other times the two intersect. The two men credited for their insight into the “Catholic social thought in the United States were foundational for upholding a core principle in Church social teaching, namely, the distinction between civil society and the state.” In the article, “Religious Freedom in a civic culture”, by Fr.
However, Locke refutes an argument that will says legitimacy is not by consent to the people but by God. Locke writes against the principle of the divine right of the king. In other words, kings rule because God place them to rule, and Locke argues that kings rule by consent of the people. Therefore, if consent ever resolves, the people have the right to create a new government (Locke, 1980 [1690], p. 7-9). Locke dangerously talks about the right of revolution.
Albeit Aristotle and Locke lived 2,000 years apart, their periods in history were similar. Both eras were marked by wars, tyrannical figures, and political and social instability in ancient Greece and medieval England. However, there was one major difference in their epochs, religion. The Greeks practice polytheism, while Christianity was practiced in Europe during Locke’s time.
Bernard Lewis’, The Roots of Muslim Rage, begins with a quotation from Thomas Jefferson’s theory of the separation of church and state, in which Jefferson argues against government involvement in the establishment of a state religion. According to Jefferson, the principle of civil government should be reversed in matters concerning religion so that the slogan of Americanism is, “Divided we stand, united, we fall.” In other words, the formation and continued progression of America’s national identity is based on it’s ability to recognize cultural diversity, while also treating all citizens as equals, regardless of their gender, race, culture, or religion. To ensure that this form of inclusion was extended to religious institutions Jefferson
The two cannot work together for religious addicts will defy the government to follow directions by the church, while more rational individuals will go against the church to obey the natural laws. Locke believed that