In Chapter 5, Locke establishes how important personal liberty is, in that each individual has the right to live and think as they choose as and that each person has equal opportunity to appropriate property and essentially reap equal benefits from the land based on their ability to develop the land. In Federalist #10, James Madison attempts to deal with problematic factions and the struggle to destroy them. Madison asserts, that men by nature form factions with similarly minded people (just like Locke’s claim the men are naturally self-serving), but the most important cause is the unequal distribution of property. Just like Locke, Madison argues that men with greater skill and talent usually have more property than people with less ability, but the government is supposed to encourage ability and equality. The only way to control a faction, Madison claims, would be to remove the causes of a faction- to do this, one has to destroy liberty, which is a “cure worse than the disease itself”.
In the Harm Principle Mill suggests that the actions of individuals should be limited to prevent the harm of others . An individual may do whatever he or she wants, as long as these actions do not harm others. Mill believes in an individual’s autonomy; being self governed. We can live as we wish, and therefor also die as and when we wish. As Mill says: “the only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilised community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others.
Various moments in time have triggered an act of urgency and produced endless questions that center around the complexity of how the world is structured and its impact on the present and past society. These questions then become a vital part of the creation of social theory. Through the different lenses of the countless theorist, the binary questions that are made to deconstruct the theoretical perspective that the anti-intellectuals present to the public, create a different framework for how the people define structure and "play". Through the viewpoints of W.E.B Dubois and Elie Pariser, the discussion of the social imagination and intellect are revealed. By integrating concepts from Dubois and Pariser, we can further analyze the structure of society and how the relationship with the past supplied the foundation for the perspectives of the classic theorist.
Thomas Hobbes – Regarding the State and Law Firstly I would like to begin my discussion with Thomas Hobbes. Hobbes was an English philosopher, known through out the world as the author of “Leviathan” which is regarded as one of the earliest examples of the social contract theory. His writings were greatly influenced by the
Equality believes in the freedom of exploration, creation, and the act of doing by oneself as despised by his brothers who believe all acts should be done together as group. Not doing so shall be evil to them and considered threatening as Equality believes it is acceptable whether you do it or not. This is the disparity of Equality and his peer’s
This determination is short-lived, however, because of the inevitable force of jurisdiction over man. The dynamic of authority is observed, noting that T.J’s differences, such as his voice, eventually leads to the carnage of his determination. When man’s uniqueness and individuality are suppressed and forced to be hidden, one can not strive. As Stanley Milgram said, obedience binds humans and authority together, and as soon as that bond breaks, regaining that fetter is more important that the prosperousness of
Lewis also rejects the claims that the moral law could be simple a social convention for two main reasons. Firstly, he states that anyone who believe human morality has ever developed should also believe that there is a standard, independent of society invents, where the society’s morality can grow closer or farther away. Secondly, the author claims that a common thread of values is identifiable in every culture. Like how the law of gravity tell us about behavior of physical objects, the author contrasts the moral law with the natural law which tells us how to behave (C.S. Lewis, 1952, p. 17).
According to Sartre, man is free to make his own decisions, but is "condemned" to be free, because we did not create ourselves. Even though we are put onto this earth without our consent, we must choose to and act freely from every situation we are in. Everything we do is a result of being free because we have a choice. Not only are we condemned to be free because we did not choose to generally exist, but we are also condemned to be free because we are the only thing that exists that has to be responsible for all of
Locke shows that our natural state is freedom and happiness. How would one achieve their natural state if the government is corrupted? In section 121, Locke provides information on how to avoid the conduct and rules of the government. Although that the government does have power over rules and conducts, Locke says there is a self evident trust between the government and the people for them to achieve their natural state. If the people are not in their natural state the government has broken the trust and the people are justified to no longer obey the governments conduct or any of the rules.
If one breaks the laws, there are consequences that they face. If there were no laws, then freedom would exist. The general public does not have the right to define freedom because the ruling class owns and defines what freedom is. Freedom is neither tangible nor obtainable because according to B. F. Skinner he stated that “People identify the state of absolute freedom as one in which aversive control is absent: that is, if there is no apparent oppression, then people imagine themselves free”. I agree with Skinner because the general public is nothing more than “Happy Slaves”, we are molded by hidden controls (laws) and don’t even realize it.
How far does this majoritarian rule extend? It has been argued that when men enter into political society, the chief end is to protect their individual property rights; the things which they have appropriated from the commons. As Locke states, since every man has a property in his own person, whatsoever he removes out of the state that nature hath provided and left it in, he hath mixed his labor with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property. Moreover, once having entered into political society, the property which every man had obtained in the state of nature ought to be protected by positive law. Locke himself states that the chief end of uniting into a commonwealth is for the preservation of individuals’
Hobbes believed that natural state of humans was violent and therefore needed order and control to ensure a just and equal society (Robinson 2016, 4). However Hobbes believed that a sovereign could maintain power without deceit and manipulation. Hobbes believed in the social contract which is when people could have a moral understanding about right and wrong to avoid the chaotic violent human nature. Hobbes believed in the idea of utilitarianism which would “maximize the most good and minimize the pain” (Robinson 201, 4). This would ensure that the sovereign was doing things for the right reasons and not to better himself but to better society as a
He believed that and act of friendliness was an act of weakness, and that those who preserved their liberty do so because they are strong. Thucydides did not believe in excellence and virtue, he was in contrast with Plato’s views; therefore, his ethical way of thinking was in accordance to that of the gods, “Our opinion of the gods and our knowledge of men lead us to conclude that it is general and necessary law of nature to rule wherever we can” () Anyhow, because of the constant danger that he had to endure during the war, his idea of the good human life was to survive by being able to control one’s mind in all circumstances, to protect oneself and loved ones, and to be generous with friends. However, to be as terrible as one could be against enemies. For him, making money, fame, and prestige was more important than the improvement of the soul. Thucydides justice depends on power; strong men will do what they have the power to do, and the weak will accept what they have to accept.