Influenced by Scotus’ formal distinctions of God in which different quiddities belong to the same subject, Spinoza transforms the propria from Descartes and Scotus to the concept of attributes. Attributes have irreducible formal reasons and expresses an infinite essence. They can be distinguished formally and they together constitute Substance in a purely qualitative sense. The Trinity of attribute-essence-substance, which is formally distinct, ontologically identical, in a nutshell, reflects that Spinoza does not reject the general definition of substance; on the contrary, he insists upon its rigid application: substance expresses itself, attributes are its expressions and through
How like-minded were these concepts though and just what did they have that was shared by others? In the Declaration of Independence, it is a common objective to state that all men are equal. Jefferson wrote: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights,...” (Jefferson 120). He definitevly states that all shall be on an even playing field within the eyes of this document. Before Jefferson, however, there was also John Locke who proposed a similar thought towards this belief.
President Johnson, without a doubt, allows his citizens to know he will no longer put up with racism, especially TOwards their neighbors. “All Americans must have the privileges of citizenship, regardless of race, and they are going to have those privileges of citizenship regardless of race.” (Johnson). President Johnson no longer wanted African Americans to be discriminated against due to their race, and he definitely gets his point across by using a strong, determined
"Are the immense standards of political flexibility and of normal equity, typified in that Declaration of Independence, broadened to us" (Douglass1)? This inquiry is the most essential. In the Declaration of Independence it is expressed, "We hold these realities to act naturally obvious, that all men are made equivalent, that they are enriched by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the quest for Happiness"(Jefferson1). He is suggesting that these rights are not being reached out to African Americans. At the point when this nation was made it was intended to be where everybody could be free and have similar rights.
It spoke about all men as equal creations and are endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights, and that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Every individual has the God-given right to live life, to live in freedom, the right to own and accrue property. For these God-given rights to be protected, governments are inducted by the people, deriving their unbiased power from the consent of the people. When the government fails to protect these rights and instead violates on them, the people have the responsibility to abolish or amend that government and to introduce a new government that actually achieves its rightful purpose. These rights are still very important these days as it was before.
(pg 9) This government would ensure that one’s freedom could not impinge upon that of another’s. By using reason to secures freedoms, Locke is essentially saying look inward to yourself, using your own reason as a citizen to give the authority to the government, seen in “Men being, as has been said, by nature, all free, equal, and independent, no one can be put out of this estate, and subjected to the political power of another, without his own consent.” This gave a new power to the freedom individual, stressing not only that we are free to
"Natural rights are those which appertain to man in right of his existence. Of this kind are all the intellectual rights, or rights of the mind, and also all those rights of acting as an individual for his own comfort and happiness, which are not injurious to the natural rights of others." --Thomas Paine, Rights of Man, 1791. The Bill of Rights were derived from the English Bill of Rights. The Founding Fathers and the public felt that the constitution didn’t set up enough boundaries for the government, they felt that the government would assume too much power and take away the “Natural Rights” of the human.
King stood up for righteousness and did not give room to fear or the enemy. More than racial equality, Dr. King believed in Human Dignity. Everyone No matter of their ethnic back ground deserved the chance at life and the basic freedoms guaranteed to them by the united states Declaration of independence “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness” (Declaration of Independence, 1776). Above all else Dr. King strived to do God’s will, He talks about the place He would travel, If God asked him where He wanted to go, He ends with stating that He would continue in the 20th century. ( (Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.,
Both King Louis XIV’s Versailles and John Locke’s Second Treatise on Government are imbued with ideas that are substantiated by divine providence in one form or another. In Versailles, this idea is that of the King’s divine reign which validates Louis XIV’s kingship. Locke, on the other hand, suggests all men are born inherently equal into God’s state of nature and have a right to liberty. While both Locke and Louis XIV substantiate their arguments through divine authority, their claims as to what God ordains is markedly different; Locke is claiming that all people must adhere to the law of nature but can chose to consent to government—thus discrediting the divine right of kings which is exactly what Louis XIV tries to convince his subjects of through Versailles. The palace of Versailles has a dual function, both symbolizing and furthering the divine power of Louis XIV.
This indicates a valid reason why all people are free and therefore deemed to be treated equally – the argument is that ‘standard’ dictates the manner in which civilization should thrive; but what happens to the marginalized or those not affiliated with any agenda seen as being necessary? The law, particularly the Constitution of the republic of South Africa in the modern society, has served as the key of liberation for all; it clearly and unambiguously claims that there is no universal standard by which all cultures – in the concept including religions – may be judged, thus analysis of symbol, practise, opinion, culture, religion or thought in a comparative manner is not