Civil disobedience rejects the idea that if one wishes to live in a certain society, one must obey that society’s laws and policies. The social contract theory is the agreement among society to put in place moral and political governing rules of behaviour in order to form the society in which they live in. According to John Locke, the State of Nature is where people live together in the state of complete liberty to conduct the best fitting life for oneself. Furthermore, the State of Nature has no governing body which results in an anarchy, where a society is unable to exist. The State of Nature assumes everyone to be equal as well as that each person possesses their own natural rights. This means that there would be a society with no education, property, healthcare, goods, or services. Ultimately, the State of Nature could easily evolve into the State of War over property disputes where people’s rights would be in danger as Locke states, “If man in the state of nature be so free; … absolute lord of his own person and possessions; equal to the greatest and subject to nobody, why will he part with his freedom? Why will he … subject himself to the dominion and control of any other power? To which it is obvious to answer, that though in the state of nature he has such a right, yet the enjoyment of it very uncertain and constantly exposed to the invasion of others … and the enjoyment of the property he has in this state is very unsafe, very insecure. This makes him willing to
Peaceful resistance is necessary for social change. The founders of the United States believed in this idea when writing the Declaration of Independence. John Locke, an enlightenment thinker who our founding fathers took ideas from, came up with the idea of the social contract. This is the agreement that a government and its people have and when citizens feel their government is wronging them then they have the right to revolt. Civil disobedience is a form of expressing the social contract and the consent of the governed.
Throughout all of time, people have needed to live according to their own agendas. Being forced to live a certain way has only caused trouble. That is why Henry David Thoreau supported civil disobedience to help people live according to their own beliefs. In the essay “On Civil Disobedience” by Henry David Thoreau, the author defined and explained the effect of civil disobedience. Thoreau defined it as, civil disobedience is any peaceful action that demonstrates the disagreement of a person or persons with their government.
In his Second Treatise of Government, Locke revealed his interests in new science, developing theories of education and knowledge (SMW, 34). One of the main points in his Treatise is that of the law of nature, where all men are in natural state of perfect freedom (SMW, 34). Locke argues, “Men being…by nature all free, equal, and independent,
Civil disobedience can mean many things to many people. To some people it could mean a non-violent means of protesting or attempting to achieve political goals; however, in the eyes of people like Martin Luther King Jr it could be different. He stated that “one has the moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws”. Martin Luther King Jr prove this by doing many non-violent protest during his time, to fight against segregation. The meaning of civil disobedience is a bit different in Henry Thoreau’s eyes.
Civil Disobedience In the dictionary civil disobedience is the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest, but Thoreau and Martin Luther King have their own beliefs to civil disobedience. In Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience” he writes about the need to prioritize one’s conscience over the dictates of laws. Martin Luther King uses civil disobedience as something that effectuates change in the government. Both Thoreau and Martin Luther King has similar yet different perspectives on civil disobedience.
The State of Nature, although a state wherein there is no civil authority or government to punish people for transgressions against laws, is not a state without morality. To Locke, persons are assumed to be equal to one another in such a state, and therefore equally capable of discovering and being bound by the Law of Nature. The Law of Nature, which is on Locke’s view the basis of all morality, and given to us by God, commands that we not harm others with regards to their life, health, liberty, or possessions. This is because we all belong equally to God, and because we cannot take away that which is rightfully His, we are prohibited from harming one another. So, the State of Nature is a state of liberty where persons are free to pursue their own interests and plans, free from interference, and, because of the Law of Nature and the restrictions that it imposes upon persons, it is relatively peaceful.
Civil Disobedience is an important moral responsibility of a citizen, however it should not get to the level of illegal activity under any circumstances, because great reform can be brought peacefully not violently. In the title named "On Civil Disobedience" by Mohandas K. Ghandi once said: “No country has ever become or will ever become, happy though victory in war”(Mohandas K. Gandhi , 148). Even that long ago, when war was at high, and people embraced it, he knew that the only thing war brought was death, and depression among civilians. This method of civil disobedience has only resulted into more wars, and no real solutions. The most efficient way to the be civilly disobedient is to be peaceful, but willing to stand up for your cause.
independent”. According to the state of nature, no man should endanger another man’s life, well-being, freedom, or possessions. Everyone is “obligated by the laws of nature to respect the rights of every man”, according to Locke. 2. It is necessary for man to give up certain liberties under the laws of nature when entering into society.
Civil disobedience is the deliberate action against an unjust law to invoke a positive change in government and society. Civilians have the right to refute these types of unjust laws to eliminate inequality and government’s unjust nature by following conscience before laws for moral guidance. As demonstrated in Antigone, this is depicted by the daughter of Oedipus, who disobeys Creon’s law for the greater good because of the laws unjust nature. In Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau, a naturalist, promotes this concept as well through his philosophical standpoint of the flaws of the government. Lastly, in Dr. King’s letter he qualifies the idea of civilians disobeying their government through non violent campaigns to stand up against
What Thoreau means by the Civil Disobedience is that every person should be govern more by his own moral compass that gives him much clearer answer to his deeds, rather than some laws of a government. “Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience, then? I think we should be men first, and subjects afterward.” (1)
Civil Disobedience by Thoreau is the refusal to obey government demands or commands and nonresistance to consequent arrest and punishment this had an extreme effect on Martin Luther King Jr and Mahatma Gandhi. They were fighting for different beliefs. However they both had the same believes about civil disobedience and they both end in the same place, jail. In the first place Gandhi believed that the only way to confronted injustice was with non-violent methods.
Accounts of civil disobediences have made their way into the paper many times since the start of this country: the Boston Tea Party, Thoreau's refusal to pay a poll tax, and Rosa Park's decision to stay seated on the bus. All of these examples represent a time of distress when people responded in non-violence to prove a point. But many would ask if this is really proving a point or if it is simply disregarding the law and setting a bad example? Well let me ask you this: would it be better to sit back and to hope that someone will speak out about the problem, or to go forward in violence thinking that that is the only way to achieve something? It seems that an act of non-violence is a way of being heard without coming across as irrational or
Civil disobedience is nonviolent resistance to a government’s law in seek of change. Civil disobedience is an effective way to bring about change because it is a harmless way of fighting an unjust law or idea, it can educate people about the cause, and it has been successful many times in history. First and foremost, civil disobedience is
Both social contract philosophers defended different views about moral and political obligations of men living in the state of nature stripped of their social characters. The state of nature illustrates how human beings acted prior to entering into civil society and becoming social beings living under common legitimacy. The state of nature is to be illustrated as a hypothetical device to explain political importance in the society. Thomas Hobbes, propounded politics and morality in his concept of the state
Only those who are born with true philosophical understanding can rule. In the Second Treatise by John Locke, Locke addresses the state of nature, which is essentially equality and freedom. Even though people have liberty, they still need to obey natural laws. On the contrary of Plato’s just city, Locke believes that absolute authority is not a civil government. A civil society is where the majority rules.