This sharing of power added ideas from the newly formed government that focused on the freedoms of citizens in England. Voltaire contended that the English government had successfully limited the power of the monarchy by affirming the power of the nobility, criticizing the French feudal system for its inability to share political power amongst the citizens of France (6). Advocating a limited monarchy to hold political discussions concerning the progress of the French government towards liberal reforms during the French Revolution. Voltaire as an enlightened philosophe, published papers about the rationality of the French government, which influenced his attitude towards the English constitutional monarchy that implemented the enlightened ideal of liberty. John Locke wrote that the purpose of electing legislative powers was to create laws and rules that protected the “properties of all the members of society,” a natural right of mankind (5).
Commonly, natural law is associated with the "laws of nature", indicating the order which naturally directs the changes and alterations of the material and physical universe. Even though the concept of "laws of nature" is quite near, its complete ethical purpose is a course for God 's rule in every essence of human nature. In accordance with St. Thomas definition, the natural law is "nothing else that the rational creature’s participation in the Eternal Law" ("SUMMA THEOLOGIAE: The Various Kinds Of Law (Prima Secundae Partis, Q. 91)"). However, it is vital to mention that the natural law is not "necessary" to follow by men.
The third formulation evolves from the first and second formulations. In other words, third formulation contains the first and second formulations. “Being the maker of universal laws makes a rational being fit to be a member of kingdom of ends, which he was already destined to be because of his nature as an end in itself.” (4:436) Further, all three formulations are answers to the question of “How can we be capable of acting in morality?” First formulation states that we ought to do nothing that could not be a universal law of nature. Second formulation adds that we ought to treat every rational being as an end in itself and not as mere means. Lastly, we ought to act such that we are the legislators in the realm of ends.
Enlightenment?” Between the 18th and 19th centuries, two considerable revolutions reflected the ideals of the Enlightenment.Though these ideals played a substantial role in both revolutions, they were more significantly shown in the American Revolution. The French Revolution began with intentions following the Enlightenment ideals but ended up with strong feelings of fear driving the people rather than princples. Enlightenment ideals heavily emphasized the importance and rights of each individual, white man; these were called natural rights. These ideals encompassed popular sovereignty where the opinions of the majority were emphasized. The Enlightenment continued the ideas of the Scientific Revolution in which there was a great emphasis on human reasoning and how it could answer questions about nature; in the Enlightenment, people believed that human reasoning could be used to solve any issues in society or politics.
Natural Humans The human condition is a subjective term used to encompass the things that differentiate humans from animals. Through the philosophy of John Locke and Jean Jacques Rousseau, their beliefs of what is natural shapes their insight into the human condition. Locke believes that nature is governed by a general law of reason and that people are free, equal, and independent in this life. Whereas Rousseau believes that a hypothetical nature is ideal yet humans are corrupted through the formation of societies. This basis in the belief of nature shapes Locke’s and Rousseau’s beliefs regarding learning, dependency, social interaction, and living when exploring the human condition.
Everyone has a right to life and that is just one of the beliefs to natural law. Natural law takes into consideration both the moral beliefs and dilemmas that come with each situation. “Natural law theorists believe that human laws are defined by morality, and not by an authority figure, like a king or a government.” (McKenna) In a situation such as the sinking boat, those who follow natural law believe that everyone is entitled to their own life and if we were to leave them on the sinking boat it would be an act of murder. Unlike government laws where it is either limited to within the state or country, one of the greatest aspects of natural law is the belief that it should be available to everyone. “The idea that every person anywhere in the world is entitled to certain rights, which others must respect is deeply attractive.” The structure of a human right in law (Numakula 1) Natural Law attempts to identify the fundamentals and the basic human needs that are required to live a good life.
He calls this the right of nature, which is the preservation of self. Hobbes explains that “the right of nature…is the liberty each man hath to use his own power as he will himself for the preservation of his own nature; that is to say, of his own life; and consequently, of doing anything which, in his own judgement and reason, he shall conceive to be the aptest means thereunto” (79). In the state of nature, there is only one natural right, the preservation of self. However, Hobbes encourages people to abandon this natural right to instead enter into civil society. Once in civil society, civil rights can be installed in place of the right of nature, however, these are not believed to be natural rights, as the sovereign instills them and can take them away as he
evil is very subjective to the individual and cannot directly guide someone to the correct path. Locke also discusses two essential laws of nature: the obligation of preserving yourself as well as the preservation of the rest of mankind as a result of human reasoning. He argues this after stating, “man has not Liberty to destroy himself, or so much as any Creature in his Possession.” (2) This allows for man to be wary about harming another individual’s life, liberty or possessions. These two accounts of the state of nature are very significant because they allow for the understanding of two different approaches to one term. Hobbes believes in an unsafe, truculent environment that individuals cannot wait to escape due to their constant feelings of doubt and being unsafe.
Arguably the most prominent leader of the French Revolution would be Maximilien Robespierre, who preached the values of liberty, equality, and fraternity to the oppressed. However, his ulterior motives proved otherwise, as he transformed France into a dictatorship. The Venezuelan Revolution was upheld by Simon Bolivar, a wealthy elite who supported the lower classes in the revolution after being inspired by writers of the Enlightenment. The Haitian Revolution was led by former slave Toussaint L’Ouverture, who was considered a liberating hero for his role in it. Although he felt that liberty did not justify laziness, he still did not tolerate abuses of power.
Deontology on the other hand is a special branch of ethics and identifies that which should be done denoting the science of duties. It mostly a categorical theory because what should be done is already known, but ethics is a hypothetical theory. The ethics and deontology strive towards the same goal to regulate the conduct in order to ensure harmony in relationship with people. Deontology calls for respecting duties and ethics calls for consent among men on the values and behaviors. The emergent of codes of duties is presented as a response to the request of ethics situated in social