Locke & Rousseau Debate Origins of Private Property

Property Debate Between Locke & Rousseau
Introduction
John Locke and Jean Jacques Rousseau, two philosophers with differing opinions concerning the
concept of private property. Rousseau believes that from the state of nature, private property came
about, naturally transcending the human situation into a civil society and at the same time acting as
the starting point of inequality amongst individuals. Locke on the other hand argues that private
property acts as one of the fundamental, inalienable moral rights that all humans are entitled to.
Their arguments clearly differ on this basic issue. This essay will discuss how the further differences
between Locke and Rousseau lead from this basic fundamental difference focusing on the
acquisition of property and human rights. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
In the state of nature property does not exist. Only once man has developed tools and has a basic
formation of living together as a community, does the concept of property arise with men building
huts. As soon as this idea of property comes about, so do arguments and conflict. Rousseau draws
on the idea that the act of agriculture and cultivating of land brings with it civilized men but at the
same time ruining humanity. Eventually all land is occupied by humans and the only way one is able
to obtain land is to steal it. Those who have land already, the rich, namely those who have attempted
to obtain more land and those who do not have any land, the poor, in desperation of survival also try
to obtain by stealing from the rich. This state of war is a situation occurring in an established civil
society.
Locke disagrees with this greedy situation as according to his theory, there would be no competition
amongst men. Men, by the law of nature are only be allowed to appropriate and own as much as he
could use because those resources would end up rotting and being wasted, leading to a liable
punishment. Consequently there is never any excessive ownership of land or resources. Therefore
other people still have plenty resources to appropriate and thus there is no need for quarrelling.
Locke's argument for appropriating labour is based on the principle that each person is free to
appropriate land in the same way as the previous person.
... Get more on HelpWriting.net ...

John Stuart Mill Liberty
On Liberty, arguably John Stuart Mill's magnus opus, is principally a criticism against the
suppression of one's individuality by an authoritarian regime or the tyranny of the majority (in the
case of democracies). He thought that so long as one's actions did not cause harm to others, no
person nor government should have the right to prohibit said action. Mill placed a heavy value on
the freedom of expression and dissent, stating "if all mankind minus one, were of one opinion, and
only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that
one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind" (23). He also
emphasized that this belief is not merely justified by personal philosophical ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
Mill's view is that when given the "opportunity of exchanging" new opinions, individuals will be
able to establish a "clearer perception and livelier impression of the truth" (24). Going off this
notion, the permission of free expression throughout a society would allow for an entire population
of individuals to begin contributing toward these exchanges of thoughts; consequently, said society
would be able to progress at a quicker rate than if particular beliefs were prohibited or repressed
because a larger amount of participation would lead to a higher chance of a new truth being
discovered. Additionally, free and open discourse could prevent the formation of 'dogmas' about
which Mill warns us. He uses politics as an example in his text, stating that a healthy political
system is one which is composed of both "a party of order or stability and a party of progress or
reform" (58). Without the radical party (progressives), the party of stability (conservatives) would
be able to impose their personal doctrines onto an entire nation with no need to provide any rational
explanation. Freedom of expression permits individuals to act as a counter voice against the
customary beliefs of a community, which would then force the majority to logically defend these
customs, thus eliminating the possibility of dogmas. Mill cites 19th century religious doctrine as an
example of a failure of this process, mentioning how an English man in 1857 "was sentenced to
twenty–one months' imprisonment" for saying words deemed offensive against Christianity (33).
Mill claims that this forbiddance of opinions that opposed the Church can be blamed as the reason
why the religion had "[made] so little progress in extending its domain" beyond European nations
during the eighteen centuries of its existence (53). Using Millian philosophy, had Christians

John Locke's Philosophies In The United States
As Americans, many of us have heard of the saying, "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of happiness."
(Graham). It is easy to take for granted (many of us have no idea that John Locke is credited for this
idea) but most of the world does not share this simple but powerful philosophy. However, to an
English nation in chaos between their Parliament and their monarch, Locke's philosophies created a
balance that would have both sides becoming winners and set the stage for human rights as well as
the capability of a tiny island to become a dominant world power.
John Locke (1632–1704), while from humble origins, used his brilliant mind to become one of the
most successful philosophers in of the age ("John Locke"). Thomas Jefferson named ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
Matters of religion, especially the nuances between Catholicism, Protestantism and even between
the various sects of Protestantism, were much debated and dissected to form policy in the Western
world. Growing up in England in the 17th century, Locke was raised a Protestant ("John Locke").
Therefore, he was free to own a bible and research it and interpret it as he wished. Locke subscribed
to the Bible's teachings and probably formed the framework for his other writings off of God's word.
For example, Locke's main point seems to be that the Bible should be taken literally and the rules of
life could be garnered there as wrote in The Reasonabelness of Christianity, 1695 ("John Locke").
This main hypothesis supported his views towards the equality of the sexes, that all people were
born free and to the political view that government should rule at the consent of the governed.
Because God told his faithful that all were born free, Locke felt that governments were accountable
to their citizens and that the people had a moral responsibility to overthrow a government that
attempts to exceed its own power (McKay, Hill, Buckler, Crowston, Wiesner–Hanks, Perry). He
also believed that a government which held itself responsible to its citizens would prove to be less
corrupt and tolerant. Even though John Locke was considered a tolerant and enlightened writer in
his time, he did hold tight to his Protestant philosophy because of his expressed belief that
governments should not tolerate atheism because a citizenry that denied God's existence would lead
to chaos ("John Locke"). Truly, his faith influenced his writings to the extension across the pond to
the American fledgling

Comparing Christian Liberty, Utopia, and The Prince Essay
Christian Liberty, Utopia, and The Prince
"A Christian is a perfectly free lord of all, subject to none...A Christian is a perfectly dutiful servant
to all, subject to none." (Luther Pg. 7) These lines show what Luther is truly about. In Christian
Liberty, Luther believes in the reestablishing of God as the inner authority. In Utopia, Thomas More
believes the power should be in one group and that the rest of the common people in the society
should all be equal like a communist society. In The Prince, Machievelli believes that the power is
within the prince. I choose Christian Liberty as the best form of authority because it is the closest to
being an honest and true way of authority. Although none of the books portray ... Show more
content on Helpwriting.net ...
"Is not such a soul most obedient to God in all things by this faith? ...What more complete
fulfillment is there than obedience in all things? This obedience, however, is not rendered by works
but by faith alone." (Luther page 13) In this passage Luther is explaining the inner man versus the
outer man. He is showing that if you trust and believe in God then he will never steer you wrong but
if you don't then, "what greater wickedness, what greater contempt of God is there than not
believing his promise...but to make God a liar or to doubt that he is truthful? That is to ascribe
truthfulness to one's self but lying and vanity in God?"
This quote shows the dismal side of not believing in God and his supreme power and authority. If
you were to doubt him whom would you go to for salvation once he gave up on you?
"Man has a two–fold nature, a spiritual and a bodily one. According to the spiritual nature, which
men refer to as the soul, he is called a spiritual, inner or new man. According to the bodily nature
which men refer to as flesh, he is called a carnal, outward, or old man." (Luther page 7) We have
first talked about the spiritual aspect of a person now we are going to talk about the physical aspect.
"Now let us turn to the second part, the outer man. Here we shall answer all those who, offended by
the word faith and by all that

Martin Luther 's On Christian Liberty
In Martin Luther's On Christian Liberty, he presents two simple propositions regarding Christianity.
The first one is "a Christian is perfectly free lord of all, subject to none" which means that as
Christians we are free from the Law by our faith in Jesus. Then, the second one is "a Christian is
perfectly dutiful servant of all, subject to all" which shows how Christians we are obligated to serve
one another (2). These two statements also relate to the twofold nature that he believes men have.
The two natures are bodily and spiritual. Bodily natures refer to the second proposition whereas the
spiritual nature refers to the first. Luther first examines the inner man, or as he introduced before,
the spiritual man. He says that the most ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
These show us that we should be humbled because we are helpless without God in our life, but they
also say that abiding by the Law is not enough to provide one with salvation. Luther describes the
promises as holy, true, and righteous, and the soul clings onto these words with strong faith because
they alone hold the power to become children of God. Promises belong to the New Testament
because this is where God fulfills the commands that He gave in the Old Testament; the promises
are what make up the New Testament. Luther believes that works cannot glorify God, but one's faith
can. He says, "God cannot be worshiped unless you ascribe to Him the glory of truthfulness and all
goodness which is due to Him" (22). No amount of good works that a person completes here on
Earth is enough to give God the praise and honor He deserves, however, someone who dedicates
their heart to God and walks through their life in faith is worshipping God just by believing in Him.
Faith is what makes Christians righteous. This does not mean that works are meaningless. If good
works are done with faith they bring glory to God, but faith is the main focus. Some believe that
works must be done to be able to fulfill the commandments, but Luther rejects this claim. He says
that works proceed from the fulfillment of the commandments within oneself. Another theology that
Luther presents is one the priesthood and kingship of all believers. He believes that because we as
Christians

John Stewarat Mill's On Liberty and the Subjection of...
John Stewarat Mill's On Liberty and the Subjection of Women
Born in 1806, John Stewart Mill was an English philosopher who highly prized the Utilitarian belief
system, or the doctrine of seeking the greatest amount of good for the greatest amount of people.
Among his various political treatises, On Liberty and The Subjection of Women are excellent
applications of his convictions in individualism and negative government. Though the subjects of
each work differ to an extent, both are written in a dialogue format, and the general principles
postulated in On Liberty can be easily applied to the second work. Essentially, Mill seeks to assert
the importance of certain personal rights and freedoms, moral beliefs, and the integrity of the ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Mill counters with a social metaphor explaining the natural processes by which unqualified
candidates are excluded from certain positions – no one demands that blacksmiths meet certain
physical criteria, for the ones who are best suited for the job will naturally come out on top. He
states, "If the political system of the country is such as to exclude unfit men, it will equally exclude
unfit women" (56). It is not the government's role to tell women that they would be "best served" by
keeping in the home; it should be the woman's choice, and thereafter we must let the chips fall
where they may.
A second doctrine that Mill values highly in On Liberty is what he refers to as an "experiment in
living", or an extension on the importance placed on freedom of opinion. "There should be different
experiments in living...so that free scope be given to varieties of character, short of injury to others"
(54). Mill encourages a person to live in such a way as to engage in "out–of–the–box" activities, and
"to use and interpret experience in his own way" (55). Essentially, mankind has much to gain by
being open–minded, and much to lose by being stubborn. The comparison of the subjection of
women to slavery is similar to his examination of the Church in On Liberty. Just as masters demand
unquestioning obedience from slaves, so too does the Church downplay individual thought, and
stress absolute, mindless submission of Christians to Church doctrine. "As soon as

Comparing Locke And Skinner's Argument Against Absolutism
Locke's theories of natural rights and civil liberties penetrate deeply into the marrow of our modern
civilisations, and, as historian Louis Hartz points out, they have become a sort of 'social norm' in the
way we think of politics. The Second Treatise can be interpreted as embodying the key influential
theory that pioneered the crusade against absolutism in places such as France and America. Locke's
belief that absolute monarchy was inconsistent with civil society stemmed from his notions of
individual natural rights and how they were fundamentally tied to the aims of governed
communities. Locke believed that one entered a civil society in order to escape what he saw as an
'unrestrained' original condition of humanity, or the 'state of nature', ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
In this sense, Locke can be seen as a Libertarian thinker. However, I will be wary of what Quentin
Skinner describes as the 'Mythology of prolepsis', in which historians project political theories that
came after the political thinker in order to achieve a "coherence" which the philosopher's argument
appears to lack. With regards to Locke, some historians make the assumption that he was a "liberal"
political theorist, which is perhaps a subconscious attempt to transform what may be a true claim in
terms of Locke's significance and impact, into a claim about the actual content of his works; which
Locke was unlikely to intend to be alined with what we understand as liberal today. Instead I will
not only closely dissect Locke's core theory of natural rights in order to observe how it shapes his
argument against absolutism, but will also analyse how it transfers onto Locke's alternative 'limited'
government, which aims to uphold the 'common good', and how this helps to further explain and
strengthen his opposition to

Martin Luther's On Christian Liberty
Martin Luther's On Christian Liberty was written as a way to explain his theology of justification by
faith. His work was written for many different people. His followers, people who disbelieved him
and people who were also confused by his theology. In order to make the way smoother for the
unlearned, Luther sets down two propositions. The first is "A Christian is a perfectly free lord of all,
subject to none," and the second proposition is "A Christian is a perfectly dutiful servant of all,
subject to all" (Luther, 2). While these two theses may seem to contradict one another they both
make perfect sense in the way individuals should lead their life. The first proposition explains that
humans are free since there is nobody controlling our ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Having faith must be the first step in being able to fulfill the commandments and be righteous. If an
individual is able to have faith and fulfill the first commandment, "You shall worship one God,"
then that individual will have no problem in fulfilling the rest of the commandments. Works are not
enough to glorify God, although they are able to if faith is present (Luther, 22). Since faith can only
rule in the inner man, and since faith alone justifies, it is clear that the inner man cannot be save,
justified, or freed by any work or action at all. The works have nothing to do with the character of
the inner man (Luther,

Essay on Mill's Principles in His Work On Liberty
Mill's Principles in His Work On Liberty
John Stuart Mill was born in London in 1806, the son of the philosopher James Mill. James Mill
was a close friend of Jeremy Bentham, the founder of utilitarianism (the theory that states that the
right course of action is the course which generates the most happiness). Bentham and James Mill
educated J. S. Mill rigorously, to such an extent that he began reading Ancient Greek at age 3. He
was reading Plato's Dialogues at age 13 – in their original form. His father trained him in political
economy, philosophy, the classics and many other intellectual subject areas.
Mill was an active philosopher. He was a member of the philosophical radicals (a group ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
So therefore the LP must be applied to everyone in a society for it to be legitimate.
The LP has many subsections which allow it to work; to just leave people free to do as they please
does not make a society legitimate. In fact, this would horrify Mill, because he is particularly
worried about the tyranny of the majority, and in this society an irrational majority could easily
exact a tyranny upon the rational minority as there would be no safeguards or restraints. The LP is
put into place to stop this happening. Mill is interested in the restrictions that law is allowed to place
on people, but he is also interested in the moral and social pressure that can be exerted by society
upon individuals. He doesn't want people to blindly follow custom.[1]
One of the sections of the LP is the harm principle (HP). This principle states that there are two
kinds of acts that a person can do. The first kind are self–regarding acts, which only affect the
individual who is doing the self–regarding act, for example using drugs to get high alone in your
house.[2] The other kind are other–regarding acts, which affect other people, for example shooting
someone in the face. A society is only legitimate when it restricts other–regarding acts, and doesn't
touch self–regarding acts, as these acts are part of the private sphere. There are problems with this
however. As mentioned in the

On Liberty John Stuart Mill Summary
In John Stuart Mill's essay On Liberty, he declares that people should be able to express their
opinions and not be silenced by the majority or ruling class, because in Mill's opinion discussion
and debate is good for the wellbeing of society. By suppressing unpopular opinions, it delays
progress and intellectual thought. Mill's argument regarding the defense of the freedom to express
opinions is effective, yet compared to his harm principle it does not stand logically. While
superficially his argument seems strong, there are contradictions in his belief based on his earlier
assertion of the utility to protect from harm that can be seen in the relatable examples given and the
act of straw manning throughout his writing.
The argument Mill makes is characterized by a few premises. The first is that society is known to
enforce opinions and beliefs upon the individual in hopes of maintaining a utilitarian good based
upon a common set of truths that the society believes in. Due to this, individual liberty is often
suppressed for the good of everyone else. When someone has dissenting views, they will be
suppressed by the majority. Yet Mill's believes that dissent is good because it helps to progress
society by disconfirming our believes through listening and reasoning with those who are different.
By addressing different views, people are able to develop their own ideas and as a society we are
able to reach a better understanding of a utilitarian truth. For Mill, humans are not

Who Is Martin Luther King On Christian Liberty
The battle for liberty has been fought on different scales with the beginning of thousands of
revolutions in the history. The ideal liberty is an ultimate goal that inflames the minds of many
people who yearn for individual freedom. In all these struggles, the definition of liberty is not the
same for different people. According to the text, "the idea of liberty has played a powerful role in
the history of Western society and culture, but the meaning and understanding of liberty has
undergone continual change and interpretation." For example in the Roman world, liberty meant the
condition of being a free man. In the Middle Ages, liberty meant having special privileges or rights.
However, the idea of liberty under religious dimension was rather new. Martin Luther King had
interpreted another important foundation of liberty in his treatise On Christian Liberty: the
important of faith and Scripture to Christian life.
King meant of liberty was based not on articulation of justification by faith alone but through the
word of Gospel. Perhaps, people should have liberty in terms of their connection to God not
controlled or managed by the Church. King understood human liberty, broadly, as the capacity for a
"spiritual, new and inward man" to make a man a "justified, free and true Christian." According to
King, "Christian man is the most free lord of all, and subject to none." Of course, faith gives us true
Christian liberty. We are free from the law as regards our salvation.

Essay about The Ten Principles of Conservatism
Conservatives believe communities can provide structure for the natural change that they believe
should be the real way of progress and that communities are capable of providing a counter force
against the concentrated power within the government (Dunn, iii). Thus, community must be near
the top in a list of fundamental conservative tenets, and community is the third in this list of ten
principles of conservatism (Dunn, iii). Conservatives believe that within the community there are
the private and voluntary organizations people can join and be a part of which can help humans
grow and flourish (Dunn, iii). This view reveals why conservatives can view the community as such
an important part in the lives of individuals.
The fourth item in ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Conservatives believe citizens should think more about what they could and should do for
themselves instead of thinking about what the government could do for them (Dunn, iii–iv). The
fear is that the central government would end up controlling more and that there would be social and
moral decay (Dunn, iii–iv).
The sixth tenet of conservatism is that democracy, in the minds of conservatives, occurs within the
"context of a constitutional order carefully designed not only to limit and separate governmental
power, but also to refine democratic opinion and encourage deliberation" (Dunn, iv). Conservatives
see that the Constitution outlines precise government activity, and so conservatives are in favor of a
strict interpretation of the Constitution of the United States. This means that conservatives want
courts to interpret the law as it is written instead of making the law. That would better keep the
original intentions of the framers of the Constitution intact by keeping the tradition and natural
change instead of injecting one's own views to cause change (Dunn, iv).
Property and its ownership, according to the seventh tenet, are important because they encourage
individuals to care more about society. They care more because they have a greater investment in it
(Dunn, iv). Conservatives suggest that because individuals are tied to their community in this solid
way, there is a greater chance that they will function responsibly and desire to preserve the social
order

With Liberty and Justice for All
In a time of transition when people began to question the purpose of government, fifty–five men
who represented thirteen victorious colonies of the new world gathered in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania. They gathered here to discuss and develop a government never before know to the
world. This revolutionary idea of government would forever change the way the world looked at
power and liberty, but in order to produce such a government the fifty–five delegates would have to
answer a couple questions first. A huge theme that had emerged throughout the preceding revolution
had been the importance of liberty. The supporters of the revolution had stressed on multiple
occasions that all men have certain liberties that they are entitled to, but the ... Show more content
on Helpwriting.net ...
He promotes the incapability of common men to govern due to emotion and biases. Jonathan
Boucher supports the monarchy by stating, "where there is no law there is no freedom" and "society
reflects the inequalities in nature" (pg114). One believes shared by both Britain and the newly
independent Colonists was that government is necessary. "Government is necessary in that no
Society of Men can subsist without it; and that Particular Form of Government is necessary which
best suits the Temper and Inclination of a People" (pg 32). The delegates believed a Democracy was
that Particular Form of Government because the purpose of government is to protect its people's
liberties, and no one is better suited to look out for the people than themselves (pg 95, pg 190). John
Adams points out once again the ever–growing lust for power. "It is indeed true, that the interest of
freedom is a virgin that everyone seeks to deflower; and like a virgin it must be kept, or else (so
great is the lust of mankind after dominion) there follows a rape upon the first opportunity" (pg
190). Adams also believed a government's people should shape it as much as it shapes them. In
order to ensure liberty limitations must be set on the government (pg 96). People are not always
good or bad, so in situations in which people are controlling people the only way to protect liberties
from being

John Stuart Mill 's Profound Work On Liberty
In John Stuart Mill's profound work On Liberty, he preaches against the conformity of the nations
and outwardly encourages and restlessly defends voice of the individual. The philosopher expresses
the importance of individuality by warning against forces such as the government and other citizens
silencing their opinion. Though Mill gives due recognition to virtues such as free speech, liberty,
and individualism, he also rightly places limitations on our freedoms to ensure that they do not
infringe upon the ones of those around us. In essence, I believe that Mill's insightfully provides a
logical answer to society on how to live and how to allow others to live; freely unless harm will
ensue. By Mill 's statement that, "[i]f all mankind minus one were of one opinion, mankind would
be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in
silencing mankind" one can gain insights into the assumptions his argument is grounded upon, his
justification for these assumptions, the limitations that should rightly be placed on free speech, and
my overall opinion on Mill's argument on free speech. Assumptions are by definition "an idea or
notion" that is outwardly known and accepted as the truth ("Assumptions"). Mill places his
argument for free speech on a basis of numerous assumptions, one of which is utility. This is an
assumption of Mill's argument because he does not question that allowing others to speak freely is
useful. The notion

Essay Exploring John Mill's Harm Principle
Freedom is a necessary principle to abide by in order for the human race to function. On the other
hand, freedom can be taken advantage of, thus resulting in harmful consequences to those directly
and indirectly involved. The article, "On Liberty" by John S. Mills, places emphasis on the
functioning of individual liberty and its co–existence with society. Mills stresses the limits of
individual liberty through what is famously known as his Harm Principle: "the only purpose for
which power may be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his
will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant"
(Cahn). With special consideration placed on drug use and free ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
This leads to an increase in criminal activity such as neglect of familial duties, robberies to fund
their dependency, and violence to defend their habits. The 'drugee' becomes a nuisance to society.
Some become homeless and exhibit poor health habits such as malnutrition and tooth decay. Other
negative effects include the transference of diseases because of needle sharing. Though drug use is a
personal choice, the effects on the rest of society are undeniable. The best intentions are formulated
on a personal level, but this is overcastted by its negative effects. This argument, however, is a bit
one–sided because the reason for using and dependency varies between users.
In pre–modern times, drugs took on a role of medicinal use. As they were distributed in a free
market without any constraints, Opium was recommended for sleepless nights, Cocaine for
anesthesia, Hashish for relaxation (Hart, Ksir & Ray). These drugs were not dubbed as harmful,
therefore, under the appropriate circumstances, provided beneficial effects to its users. More
recently, individuals are more inclined to use drugs as an 'escape'. Stimulants provide a sort of
alternate existence which tends to reduce mental tension, increase energy, or induce euphoria (Hart,
Ksir & Ray). Argumentatively speaking, drug use only affects the user, so there is no valid
reasoning for impairing the freedom of citizens by prohibiting them. Individuals benefit by having
the freedom to use

How Did John Locke's Influence On Government
John Locke set the foundation for the government of the United States (1). Locke was born August
29, 1632 in Wrington, United Kingdom and died on October 28, 1704 in Essex, United Kingdom(2).
He was from a wealthy family, therefore his dad sent him to Westminster School; he then went to
Christ Church, University of Oxford where he was a lecturer and studied medicine(3). Locke
believed that education was extremely important(4). He also had written many influential pieces on
education and government(5). Locke had many ideas for the ideal government, which helped shape
the foundation of the United States government(3).Shaftsbury had the vision of not having a
monarch and having a fair government, which later influenced Locke's writings and aligned ... Show
more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Not only did he believe that the government should protect the life, liberty, and property of its
citizens, as said in the "Two Treatises of Government"(1689). Moreover, this piece explains that the
citizens of this government have the right to remove it from power if the government fails to protect
life, liberty, and property. Locke had the belief that church and state should be separate from each
other in "A Letter Concerning Toleration"(1689). He believed that the government should be
dispersed the government power into three groups. Locke had believed that people could check
themselves and that there should be checks and balances in the government.(7). The three groups
Locke believed would be good were legislative, executive, and federative, which is known as
judicial today(8). These ideas show Locke influenced the understanding of the government in the
modern world because these three branches of government exist

On Christian Liberty Augustine Summary
Nandanie George CLDV 210–E March 25, 2015 In order to live life on a morally right path we have
to know to our minds what is considered the right thing to do and the wrong thing to do. Can one be
truly virtuous if they are surrounded by sins that block these paths? Ones virtue plays an important
role in the making of themselves and how they conduct their life in order to meet the highest
goodness possible. In On Christian Liberty, Luther argues that the highest good is having faith in
god, while in The City of God; Augustine argues the highest good is eternal life. Luther believes the
purpose of good and right behavior is saving oneself from sin. Doing what is morally right will be
the redemption of your sins. Having faith in god himself ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net
...
As quoted, "Thus it is always necessary that the substance or person should be good before any
good works can be done, and that good works should follow and proceed from a good person"
(137). Luther cautions that when educating on Christian freedom one must constantly encourage to
continue with Christian donation to charities and not show off with it or strongly criticizing those
who are weak, but also not calming or indulging those that are offended. Christian freedom does not
brag about whose included or whose excluded, but tries to walk the road along the paved line,
cooperating with the weak in their lack of understanding, and merging with the religious in hopes of
destroying the roadblocks they've

Philosophical Approach Of John Stuart Mill
Philosophical Approach of John Stuart Mill
Has one ever speculated what the conception of liberty is? Liberty has the ability to challenge ideas
of the past into new ones. Mill expressed his understanding about liberty in several ways in his
essay named, On Liberty. In this paper, I will strongly explain the significance of quotation,
assumptions mills argument depends upon, limitations in the right of free speech and agreement
with Mill's points of view. Without further ado; let me activate the critical analysis of Mill's
approach regarding liberty.
To commence, Mill's attempt was to lay out an ideology that different opinions are drastically
desirable and necessary in the community. If we consider the passage by Mill that expresses, ...
Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Furthermore, this quotation draws the outlines that the norm of community is strongly based on
beliefs and that one's belief to self is of significant regardless if true or false. Likewise, today people
like to have all the newest popular versions of technology gadgets to fit in within the society norms.
So, the passage expressed that to fit in with opinions, one follows those that are more popularly
known to the views of the community. However, the quotation allows for the idea that interest of
people counts, but not greater than everyone else bringing forth the idea of equality. Mill
proclaimed, "they have no authority to decide the question for all mankind, and exclude very other
person form the means of judging" (Mill, 14). Thus, everyone opinions regardless of their
background diversity should be permitted to have a voice and taken into account. This is because
opinion gives a change for errors to be amended and to reanalyze ideology that some may consider
true. Overall, opinions of minority should be secured because it brings forth liberty and liberty
increases when opinions of all are expressed. Also, as time progressed new ideas approach which
may disprove something that was true in the past.
As expressed in the essay, On Liberty, there is the conception liberty override the idea of
conformity. Conformity of the notion to alter and fit in with rest of the community. Mill showed that
tyranny of majority should

John Winthrop's Views In Two Primary Aspects Of Liberty
1. John Winthrop believes in two primary aspects of liberty. These he refers to as civil and federal.
Winthrop interprets civil liberty as that of free will; the ability to make one's own decisions
regardless of any repercussions. This is the purest form of liberty, immune to contamination by
external influence. Federal liberty refers to liberty imposed by authority, such as a governing body.
In this form of liberty, the particular form of authority is responsible for maintaining peace and
order within the community. Winthrop illustrates the subjugation of women through marriage and
the Christian church as prime examples of federal liberty. Some may deem Winthrop's views on
liberty as hypocritical due to his own human nature. Throughout his ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Bacon criticizes Sir William Berkeley for not holding the interest of the colonists as his primary
concern. Instead, Bacon claims that Berkeley's empathy for the local Native Americans eclipses that
for his own subjects. Colonists of the time could have easily pieced together the hypocrisy behind
Bacon's call to arms. Nathaniel Bacon held a great deal of land and merely wished to expand upon
it. The motive behind this was purely for his own gain. I would also like to note the similarity
between Bacon's feelings for expansion and Manifest Destiny in the 19th–century.
2. In his letter to Sir Thomas Dale, John Rolfe pleads his case for desiring to marry Pocahontas.
Rolfe's motivation behind his marriage to Pocahontas is to establish peace between the colonists of
Jamestown and the Powhatans. He also expresses his intent to convert his bride to Christianity.
Rolfe's actions come off as selfless when he explains his concerns for the betterment of Jamestown
and England. These selfless actions set a precedent with relations between colonists and Native
Americans. Peace between the two factions was reestablished in 1614 and later broken in

The Human Rights Act, Remains Ambiguous And Divergent
The response to the much conspicuous question that many philosophers cross–examine
encompassing the Human Rights Act, remains ambiguous and divergent. 'Do we have more rights
than before? ' Seems to be key topic in todays society and although the framework provided by the
Police and Criminal Evidence Act (1984) and subsequently the safeguards provided by the
legislation on liberty for subjects/citizens, the effectiveness of the safeguards in terms of police
power and of arrest, detention, interrogation and the handling of police complaints remains under
considerable telescopic scrutiny. While the accepted definition for 'powers of arrest ' clearly states
that ' 'the powers of arrest are not something to be abused by the police or by a public citizen and are
powers that should only be used responsibly ' ', in the opinion of Tony Benn and Andrew Hoods
(1993), authority rests with self–serving elites amd tje omdividua;s liberties envisaged by
philosophers auch as Tom Paine are far from ensrhined. In fact, Tony Benn goes as far as to say that
in Britain, we are in fact 'subjects ' rather than citizens. If Britain were to ever become a fairer
democracy, Benn believed that that a radical and democratic ovehaul of the system is essential.
While the British constitution promotes the intention of treating citizens as 'freemen ' (or women) as
well as adverstise the purpose of the states existance as a mechanism to serve the citizen aas well as
embody the aggregate of the

The Rhetorical Analysis Of Martin Luther's On Christian...
Martin Luther wrote "On Christian Liberty," as an attempt to avoid conflict with the Church. In it,
he justifies his beliefs, primarily on the importance of placing faith in Christ above works in the
grand scheme of salvation. Throughout the treatise, he address who a Christian should be, the nature
humanity, and the role he believes faith, works, and ceremonies playing in forming a good
Christian. This, in turn, entices the reader to critique and search of his or her self, what it means to
be a good Christian and how to gain salvation. Within the first few pages of "On Christian Liberty,"
Luther creates a paradox that causes readers to think deeply about their own role as believers of
Christ. In it, he claims that a Christian is: "...a perfectly free lord of all, subject to none while, at the
same time, being a perfectly dutiful servant, subject to all (pg.2)." Through faith, the most important
part of a person's salvation, a Christian gains freedom and liberty. However, a Christian becomes a
servant of all through love, subjecting themselves to the needs of others as Christ did. Luther
identifies the "two natures of man" as the body and the spirit. These two natures continuously
conflict. The body is the flesh or a person's outward nature while the soul represents the inner
person. The bodily nature of humanity has no bearing on the righteousness of the soul. Luther states
that the soul cannot benefit if the body and flesh is well. Regardless of outward wealth,

John Locke Property
In an attempt to understand the pivotal role of government in society, 17th century English
philosopher John Locke proposed that "Government has no other end, but the preservation of
property." This is the fundamental characteristic behind the political ideology Locke is the father for,
Classic Liberalism. In today's America, Classic Liberalism is an ideology "that values the freedom
of individuals – including the freedom of religion, speech, press, assembly, and markets – as well as
limited government." With the understanding of human nature through Locke's writings, it becomes
clear that government should only be involved with protecting the individual from others, as stated
by Locke himself.
First, it is vital to understand the nature of ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
During Reagan's administration, Continental Illinois, the 8th largest commercial bank at the time,
was bailed out because there was a fear that if International bond holders saw a large bank failing,
they would pull money out of all American bank. So, after Continental Illinois was bailed out, large
banks started to become dependant on the government. They began to act riskier with investments
because they knew the government would bail them out. During Bill Clinton's presidency a similar
situation occurred, further clearing the message that if you are a large bank and are about to fail, the
government will take tax payer's money to bail you out. Again, during Bush's last year as president,
because of a fear of a recession, Bush once again bailed out large banks. It is a continuous cycle that
unnecessarily and negatively impacts everyday people. Government has now got itself trapped in a
bubble where they will constantly bail out large banks due to the fear of a economic collapse, but
each time the government bails out the banks, the potential crisis worsens. The government is not
responsible for saving the banks, only our

The Influence Of J. S. Mill On Liberty
1) J.S MILL On Liberty
Mills' take On liberty is similar to Huntington's argument on clash of civilization because mills
believe that society will always have diversity. The fact that people of different belief will co–exist
but liberty and freedom of an individual is vital in keeping a society oppression free. In an attempt
to answer question One section C, I will discuss J.S Mill theory On liberty for an individual and the
society.
Mill believes in the individual and his freedom to exercise his rights a person so long it does not
harm others. That no one should be forced or pressured into doing things against their will and not
even society, forceful ruler ship and public opinions of other should interfere in an individual's
decisions. According Mill individual liberty is a good thing to major extent because he think it is a
means to protect citizens form illegitimate leadership. The citizens had "Political liberty" to serve as
a watch dog for the government in the case they abused their political power. The citizens could
impeach such leaders if they found guilty. This kind of liberty makes the political leaders active and
keep them on their toes. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Their government became their servants and will have do anything people wanted. This type of
system was the direct opposite of a tyrant government , an extreme form "democracy where the
citizens make all the decisions. The government becomes a puppet with no opinion. The problem
with this system is that government is also made up people (less of the population) therefore the
majority becomes oppressive to the minority . This is what happen in the modern day society where
the majority imposes their "standards" on

The Value Of Liberty ; Rousseau Vs. Mill
The Value of Liberty; Rousseau v. Mill The views and conceptions of what liberty is have continued
to change over time as society changes. Freedom is defined as the right to do "act, think, and speak
as one wants" without anyone or anything infringing on that right, but there exists types of freedoms
or liberties. Fyodor Dostoevsky, Jean–Jacques Rousseau, Stuart Mill, and Thomas Jefferson all give
their conceptions of what liberty is and while all of them believe government should not have so
much authority or any authority at all, they all have similar and different views on freedom. While
Rousseau believes that there should be a "social contract" between the individual and the sovereign,
Stuart Mill disagrees and believes that authority can only be exercised over the individual if it is
harmful. Mill understands what freedom really is and its value because he believes that public
authority does not have legitimate power over the individual and that the individual should be able
to exercise their rights without any interference. Rousseau does not truly understand what freedom
is because the "general will" can interfere with an individual's rights.
In "The Grand Inquisitor" written by Fyodor Dostoevsky, Dostoevsky focuses on free will of
humans being given up in exchange for a more secure "free will". Ivan reads aloud a poem he wrote
in which Christ is reborn and goes to Spain, and there he is healing the sick. After healing the sick
and a dead child, the Cardinal Grand

Mill On Liberty
"Human nature is not a machine to be built after a model, and set to do exactly the work prescribed
for it, but a tree, which requires to grow and develop itself on all sides, according to the tendency of
the inward forces which make it a living thing" (Mill page 81). On Liberty was written by John
Stuart Mill and published in 1859. Mill was a huge believer in free thinking and individuality, and
he despised conformity and 'mass opinion'. Throughout the novel, Mill criticizes religion, mass
education and the government, because he believes that these three institutions will prevent
individuals from developing their own individuality. The purpose of this novel is that Mill wants to
portray that liberty is beneficial to individuals and the society as a whole. In the first chapter, Mill
provides a brief overview of the meaning of liberty. Mill focuses on a historical review of the
concept of liberty, starting with ancient Greece and Rome and continuing on to England. In the past,
liberty primarily meant protection from tyranny, but throughout time, the meaning of liberty
changed along with the role of rulers. He also talks about his argument in favor of respecting liberty
to the point that it does not harm anybody else. In the second chapter, Mill focuses on the issue of
weather or not people should be able to restrict others expressions of opinion. He believes that
silencing opinions is unlawful and he explains that in this quote: "The peculiar evil of silencing the

Liberty Christian Narrative Report
I am writing to you today to tell you about an exciting opportunity I have through my school,
Liberty Christian. My senior class will be going on a mission trip to COSTA RICA from Saturday,
May 6, 2017 to Friday, May 12th. During this time, we will be working with the mission agency
SCORE International in order to serve God by serving the Costa Rican people. We will have
opportunities to serve and minister to the people we meet through various service opportunities,
such as: children's ministry, preaching, drama, and humanitarian aid distribution. I'm looking
forward to seeing what God will do in my life as my classmates and I serve Him in COSTA RICA. I
would ask you to please pray that during this time: – I will be sensitive

Christianity In Martin Luther's On Christian Liberty
Religion is the most important aspect of many people's lives, serving as a roadmap to live a virtuous
life while promising eternal life and salvation. In his work On Christian Liberty, Martin Luther
writes on what it means to truly be Christian and how to achieve salvation. Luther discusses many
aspects of Christian faith, including the difference between the inner man and outer man, the effect
of works on salvation, the marriage with Jesus as a result of faith, how individuals should act
towards others, and the important notion of Christian liberty that arises because of one's faith.
Luther's ideas were highly controversial at the time as many of them opposed the thinking of the
Catholic Church, one of the most powerful institutions in the world. The Catholic Church adamantly
disagrees with many of the ideas expressed by Luther, including the value that works, the church,
and humility has in salvation. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
The inner person is referred to as the spiritual nature and the soul, while the outer man is referred to
as the bodily nature and the flesh. Salvation is entirely dependent on the inner man. A Christian
achieves salvation through faith in God alone, as expressed by Luther when he writes "therefore it is
clear that, as the soul needs only the Word of God for its life and righteousness, so it is justified by
faith alone and not any works". External works have no effect on the inner man or on salvation.
Thus, it is clear that faith is achieved only through the inner man's faith and God and is not effected
in any way by works or the outer man. The inner man needs neither laws nor good works, and will
actually be hurt by them rather than justified if he believes they will lead to his salvation. No
external thing has any effect in producing Christian

John Stuart Mill Liberty Sparknotes
Restyn Robbins
PHIL Analysis 2
Introduction:
John Stuart Mill's essay titled Liberty is about his position on liberty. The essay covers every from
of liberty and how as a society we are can hinder or increase liberty. Mill believes individual liberty
has to exist in order for society to advance. The cultivation of vital individuality is what ignites
progress within society, for many reasons and he summarizes his findings in his essay. The main
theme I will be further analyzing is that without a strong will to consistently create vital
individuality, society will cease to progress.
Summary:
John Stuart Mill voices his opinions on individual freedom as it relates to both social and political
circumstances. Personal freedoms is the pursuit of happiness, freedom of speech and expression.
Mill defines liberty as the relationship between the State and the individual people within the state.
Mill believes that power has to be guarded if we are going to develop and progress as human kind.
The government should not interfere with anyone's civil liberties as long as those actions do not
harm anyone. The way the state creates an effective democratic society is giving everyone personal
rights to freedom and expression without the individuals having to censor themselves. Additionally,
Mill questions the limits of power that can be legally exercised by the government over citizens. The
question Mill is attempting to answer is where the line has to be drawn between authority and

The Legalization Regulation Of The Sex Trade Essay
This paper argues for the decriminalization plus regulation of the sex trade. This paper will defend
the position that activities associated with adult prostitution (advertising, buying, soliciting, living
off the avails and keeping a bawdy house) should be decriminalized/ legalized due to: a) the
capacity for criminalization to infringe on sex worker's fundamental rights to life, liberty, and
security and b) the capacity for criminalization to prohibit sex worker's from actively preventing
harm to oneself. Philosophical support for this position will come from arguments rooted in human
rights' perspective, John Stuart Mill's "harm principle" and arguments rooted in feminist theory. The
harm principle contends "it is only justifiable to interfere with the autonomy or liberty of adults in
order to prevent harm (physical harm & deprivation of rights and liberties) occurring to other
persons". Whereas feminist theory consists of a view rooted in gender equality rights and social
justice. This paper will discuss and respond to criticisms and objections rooted in legal moralism,
and welfare paternalism that support the criminalization of prostitution. Furthermore, this paper will
draw upon arguments from Prostitution Reference, and Supreme Court of Canada's Bedford Case;
where judges and litigants interpreted criminalization of activities related prostitution within the
context of (s.213) communication, (s. 210) keeping a bawdyhouse, and (s.212) living off the avails.

The On Liberty By John Stuart Mills
ON LIBERTY In John Stuart Mills' profound work, On Liberty he preaches against the conformity
of the nations and outwardly encourages and restlessly defends voice of the individual. The
philosopher expresses the importance of individuality by warning against forces such as the
government and other citizens silencing their opinion. Though Mill's gives due recognition to
virtues such as free speech, liberty and individualism he also rightly places limitations on our
freedoms to ensure our own freedoms do not infringe upon the ones of those around us. In essence, I
believe that Mill's insightfully provides a logical answer to society on how to live and how to allow
others to live; freely unless harm will ensue. By Mills' statement that, "[i]f all mankind minus one
were of one opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he
had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind" one can gain insights into his justification
for this argument, the limitations that should rightly be placed on free speech, the assumptions that
are the basis for this argument. Throughout Mills' essay he argues against the oppressive tyranny of
the government in silencing the opinions of others. He warns that, "there needs to be protection also
against the tyrant of the prevailing opinion of feeling; against the tendency of society to impose... its
own ideas on those who dissent from them" (Mills 9). Further, Mills justifies this statement by

The View of Human Nature and the Role of the State
The view of human nature and the role of the state:
Human nature is difficult to define but can be summed up as the innate characteristics and traits that
all human beings are born with, which is free from culture influence. What these characteristics and
traits are, is often cause for debate as it is a general belief that these should apply to everyone.
However the problem lies in the fact that no two humans are the same therefore reaching a
unanimous decision on what human nature is, is near enough impossible. Over the years three
ideologies have emerged as the leading theories on human nature; conservatism, classical liberalism
and Marxism. The three have their own differing views on what the basis of human nature is. These
... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
Classical liberalisms views on human nature are similar to conservatism in the sense that John
Locke, a key classical liberal theorists agrees with Hobbes's view on "the state of nature." Liberals
believe that humans are egoistic and selfish with little interest to the rest of society. However unlike
conservatives, liberals believe that humans are capable of making rational decisions which are in
their best interests. Living in the state of nature is in no ones best interests, so according to liberals
individuals would agree to the formation of a state. However as classical liberalism believe that
humans are capable of rational decision making, liberals do not think the state needs to be as strong
as conservatives do. Liberals believe that the state should only interfere when an individual or
people are a threat to others safety, the harm principle.
Unlike both conservatives and classical liberals, Marxists views on human nature are optimistic.
Marxism is based on the views and beliefs of Karl Marx, who believed humans are naturally
cooperative and seek social harmony. Contrary to most definitions, Marxism states that human
nature is moulded by the experiences and circumstances of
social life and have a high capacity for personal and social development. Due to this Marxists

The Christian Liberty Party Is A Minor Conservative...
The Christian Liberty Party is a minor conservative political party in the U.S., which used to be
known as the American Heritage Party (Eby). The name Christian Liberty Party The name expresses
an idea, a principle for our times, that points to Christ as the source of Liberty for both men and
nations (Eby). The Christian Liberty Party formed to provide an explicitly Christian perspective on
politics (Eby). They help equip Christians as Statesmen, mobilize Christian Citizens, and Advance
Christian Solutions (Eby). This party will benefit our society and our nation because we will have
leaders who preach equality and a holy life (Eby). It would put an end to the bias and greediness of
our world's leaders today. We further acknowledge our heritage as a Christian nation as confirmed
by the U.S... Supreme Court when it ruled in 1892" (Eby). The Christian Liberty Party founded by
William C. Goodloe in 1992, and Dan Eby in 2000 (The Politics and Governance Portal). The ultra–
conservative party's ideology is based on the tenets of Christianity (The Politics and Governance
Portal). It seeks to frame national political debates, and thereafter, the governing of the nation, under
the principles of Christianity and the words of the Bible (The Politics and Governance Portal). In
1992 they were known as the American Heritage Party, in 1998 they switched to Washington
Taxpayers Party, and finally in 2010 they became the Christian Liberty Party (The Politics and
Governance Portal). This

Jean-Jacques Rousseau's Influences on the Honors...
As with any modern community, there are certain freedoms that need be alienated in order to live in
peace with fellow neighbors. It is the HRC covenant, the Guide to Community Living, and the
prayers of Taizé give meaning to the community known as the Honors Residential College (HRC).
The texts each serve as evidence of Jean–Jacques Rousseau's Social Contract Theory in work, each
including a type of self–sacrifice for the greater good and solidification of the community.
This analysis will begin by reviewing the obligations stated in the HRC covenant. The HRC
covenant mentions that as a community the people must "commit [themselves] to being a
community of faith seeking understanding" (Covenant & Expectations). In committing to this
statement, the people are asked to open their minds to new ideas and to put aside old prejudice. In
saying that the residents of the community must commit to seeking understanding, sharing, and
loving one another, they are in effect giving up their freedoms to not do these things. Additionally,
HRC residents are expected to participate in discussions, prayer, service, and live in good will
continuously while living as a member of that community. Indeed, they must "devote [themselves]
actively" to providing a friendly, warm atmosphere (C & E).
Rousseau's Social Contact Theory explains the covenant in that it demonstrates an undertaking of
responsibilities for being a part of the HRC community. Rousseau contends that "Some form of
association

Why Is Individual Liberty Important
I believe in individual liberty it is extremely importance to any society. One thing that is important
to an individual liberty is freedom, which I value the most today. Freedom give people the
opportunity to speak, the right to their own opinion and pursue happiness. Freedom is very
important to every human being because it gives you a chance to express yourself and give you an
overall quality of life. However, there is certain limitations when it comes to freedom that we all
must live with and that is the laws that we all must obey.
People have the right to freedom of speech however, every person is responsible for their own
action, life, and well–being, everyone should be judge individually regardless of race, gender, and or
religion. ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
I feel that the laws for personal liberty go too far when a woman who is experiencing an unwanted
pregnancy and decide not to carry the baby to full term by terminating the pregnancy by utilizing a
safe and affordable abortion, society has been against abortion for years and have been trying to stop
legalizing abortion. This is a woman rights and should stay a woman chose to decide whether she
want to carry a baby full term or not. Stop legalizing abortion in my opinion would not be in the
best interest of the women. There could be several reasons why a woman doesn't want to continue
her pregnancy, it could be for reason like she was rape, not financially ready, to young or to old, not
marry, and not stable to start a family. I personally feel that having an abortion it not affecting
anyone or anybody. It is a personal decision for the individual. Laws are created to protect the

The Politics of Edmund Burke as Related to Classical...
Edmund Burke was a political philosopher and a member of British Parliament who is generally
considered to be the founder of modern conservatism. His politics are a fusion of other political
theorists, and thus aren't particularly cohesive or systematic. However, Burke is an important figure
in the history of political thought and he was known for his ability as an orator and statesman. Burke
saw society as if it was an evolving organism. He felt that, like a body, all aspects of a society must
be functioning properly in order for society as a whole to remain healthy. Also like a body, he saw
society as always attempting a homeostasis. He claimed that there was a delicate balance with all
the institutions of society. When one ... Show more content on Helpwriting.net ...
This concept was known as subsidiarity. One other concept that Burke advocated is that of virtual
representation. Burke felt that when one was elected, the people elected an individual, not a populist
mouthpiece. Therefore it wasn't necessary for him to reflect the positions of his constituents. Instead
he would use his own judgement in governmental decisions. This is one area that is can be traced to
modern conservatism, as conservatives typically feel the need to legislate their personal morality.
Even though Burke is considered to be the founder of modern conservatism, his ideas are directly
connected to classic liberalism. This political ideology placed an emphasis on individual and
economic liberty, as classic liberals believed this would result in the greatest prosperity for all. The
term liberal originally was derived from the idea that they were liberating the economy and citizen
from needless government constraint. This ideology eventually evolved into libertarianism.
Libertarianism is most directly connected to the British philosopher John Stuart Mill. Mill felt that
government should never get so big that it is encumbered by its bloated size. This ideology places a
strong emphasis on liberty. They believe that the market economies are self–regulating and need no
government intervention of any kind. The government's sole

John Stuart Mill Essay
Majorities tend to prevent any opportunity that a minority group might have to gain support for a
contradicting opinion. It is incredibly easy for members of society to abandon their beliefs in the
midst of an overpowering majority. This process leads to an unequal society in which the rights of
the people are restricted. In the essays, On Liberty and On Representative Government, written by
John Stuart Mill, there is a concern for the "tyranny of the majority." He expresses his concern in,
On Liberty, by supporting an increase in individual liberties. It is expressed again in, On
Representative Government, by promoting a "true democracy." Mill proposes remedies for
combating this "tyranny of the majority," and further discusses the ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
To counter this notion of monarchy by majority, Mill offers remedy through individual liberties in,
On Liberty.
By increasing the individual liberties of men in a society, you increase their personal freedom of
forming individual opinions. The less restricted a person's thoughts, the more unique their opinions
become. `In proportion to the development of his individuality, each person becomes more valuable
to himself and is, therefore, capable of being more valuable to others' (On Liberty 60). To constrain
someone's thoughts would result in that person becoming more likely to join the majority. Allowing
someone to think for themselves will help acknowledge the voices of all the classes of a society.
"Having said that Individuality is the same thing with development and that it is only the cultivation
of individuality which produces, or can produce, well–developed human beings..." (On Liberty 61).
Despite their fallibilities, an individual is more likely to know what would make him happy than
someone else would. Therefore, if people develop independence of judgment and take responsibility
for their own happiness, utility will be maximized. "I regard utility as the ultimate appeal on all
ethical questions; but it must be utility in the largest sense, grounded on the permanent interests of
man as a progressive being" (On Liberty 10). Human progress, best

Karl Marx And John Locke
Karl Marx and John Locke share immediate commonalities. Their philosophies were the foundation
of two incredibly influential ideologies: classical liberalism and Marxism. The former had impact in
the founding of the United States Constitution and in the rejection of the divine right of kings. To
see the impact of the latter one need look no further than the force of Communism in the 20th
century. Their ideas in many cases share come common ground, but on most issues are rivals in
thought. In speaking of either of these philosophers, it is important to begin with the ontological
assumptions at the root of their ideas. Locke was a devout Christian and believed that "God gave the
world to men in common" (Locke). Continuing on this belief, ... Show more content on
Helpwriting.net ...
Loose societies arose in order to take advantage of natural resources and promote their survival and
to meet their immediate needs. (Schumaker 161) These ideas do not necessarily conflict, but there
are noted differences. Locke's idea of the state of nature is that man is self–interested and entitled to
guide his life as he pleases, but he has no right to impose his will on others. Each man has his rights
given to him from God. According to Marx, man leads his life guided by the natural world. But,
men realized that they could adapt and mold the world to their advantage. "...They discovered that
limited forms of cooperation enabled them to deal with natural disasters and exploit nature more
effectively" (Schumaker 161). So, both perhaps believed that man have the same inherent liberties,
but Marx would say that he isn't limited by the "state of license." These thoughts on the state of
nature have further implications that in large part determine each philosophers' stance on what the
purpose of government actually is. Marx believed that "loose" society was ideal and marked man's
most optimal state. However, as time passed, man desired more than simply his basic needs. People
grew to desire more goods. Production increased, and because people did not equally possess skill
and intelligence, some acquired more than others. Those who gained more had greater advantage,
and societies evolved. Class distinctions began. Marx posited that

The Political Differences, Social Liberalism And Conservatism
"We will not agree on every issue. But let us respect those differences and respect one another. Let
us recognize that we do not serve an ideology or a political party; we serve the people", by John
Lynch. In this quote written by John Lynch, it expresses the fact that there are many differences
within ideology and political parties, but at the end of the day they are to serve the people and they
should be respected for their differences. Therefore, there are wo major ideologies that have
numerous differences and similarities. Within these ideologies there are social conservatives, which
is "a version of conservatism that advocates public policies based on traditional morals and religious
values." (Demichele 2017). Likewise, there is social liberalism a version of liberals that belief "of
liberty, rights, and egalitarianism with a focus on collective equally" (Demichele 2017). The social
liberalism represents more of collectivism and the social conservatives is more individualism.
Religion in a society and government is very important because the rules and regulation can come
from religion. In a social conservatism society, religion and traditional morals are practiced and
embedded in their society while in a social liberal society is more focused on secular stance where
there is no religious or spiritual basis. This paper would explore, the similarities and differences in
regard to the two ideologies, social liberalism and social conservatives, and their views on
feminism,

The Importance Of The Bill Of Rights
One of the major topics within both the government and the general public today is the concept of
citizens rights and morals being upheld accordingly by both the law and by Congress in accordance
with the Constitution. However, the majority of the people who recognized that they are entailed to
certain laws upheld by the Constitution, are often mistake by the realization that although they are
most definitely entitled to these laws... there is a big difference between the laws that uphold ones'
liberties and the laws that uphold ones' rights. In the U.S. the Constitution, being the supreme law of
the land, lays out in the Bill of Rights certain laws that each United States citizen is not only entitled
to, but must also uphold in concept of morality and representation of their nation. However,
although these laws uphold ones' morality and honor, it also defines the true difference between a
liberty and a right. The Bill of Rights demonstrates that those aspects which are at liberty to us, help
to protect ones' self from improper course of action whether that be towards that government or
towards thy neighbor... whereas a right demonstrates what actions that those in authority must
uphold in order for each and every United States citizen to be both protected and equally
represented from all aspects of life. While these rights help to protect one another, the liberties give
each person the freedom to see inside not only their–self, but also inside the lives of others and seek
how

Locke & Rousseau Debate Origins of Private Property

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

More from Elizabeth Jenkins

More from Elizabeth Jenkins (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Locke & Rousseau Debate Origins of Private Property