That's not what I understand about Locke's ideas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_contract#John_Locke.27s_Second_Treatise_of_Government_.281689.29
John Locke explained a "social contract" is
a belief that government has final authority over citizens
an agreement that all people have the right to life, liberty, and property***
an agreement between citizens and their government
a belief that government should be dived into three branches
9 answers
Is it a belief that government should be dived into three branches. I guess it would be that after i read the link you gave me.
I saw nothing about the three branches in that article,
From the above article:
"John Locke's Second Treatise of Government (1689)[edit]
John Locke's conception of the social contract differed from Hobbes' in several fundamental ways, retaining only the central notion that persons in a state of nature would willingly come together to form a state. Locke believed that individuals in a state of nature would be bound morally, by The Law of Nature, not to harm each other in their lives or possession, but without government to defend them against those seeking to injure or enslave them, people would have no security in their rights and would live in fear. Locke argued that individuals would agree to form a state that would provide a "neutral judge", acting to protect the lives, liberty, and property of those who lived within it.
While Hobbes did argue thus for near-absolute authority, Locke argued for inviolate freedom under law in his Second Treatise of Government. Locke argued that government's legitimacy comes from the citizens' delegation to the government of their right of self-defense (of "self-preservation"). The government thus acts as an impartial, objective agent of that self-defense, rather than each man acting as his own judge, jury, and executioner—the condition in the state of nature. In this view, government derives its "just powers from the consent [i.e, delegation] of the governed,".
"John Locke's Second Treatise of Government (1689)[edit]
John Locke's conception of the social contract differed from Hobbes' in several fundamental ways, retaining only the central notion that persons in a state of nature would willingly come together to form a state. Locke believed that individuals in a state of nature would be bound morally, by The Law of Nature, not to harm each other in their lives or possession, but without government to defend them against those seeking to injure or enslave them, people would have no security in their rights and would live in fear. Locke argued that individuals would agree to form a state that would provide a "neutral judge", acting to protect the lives, liberty, and property of those who lived within it.
While Hobbes did argue thus for near-absolute authority, Locke argued for inviolate freedom under law in his Second Treatise of Government. Locke argued that government's legitimacy comes from the citizens' delegation to the government of their right of self-defense (of "self-preservation"). The government thus acts as an impartial, objective agent of that self-defense, rather than each man acting as his own judge, jury, and executioner—the condition in the state of nature. In this view, government derives its "just powers from the consent [i.e, delegation] of the governed,".
an agreement between citizens and their government
right?
Right.
Next time, please read your text before you post your guesses.
Next time, please read your text before you post your guesses.
OK and sorry + thanks!
You're welcome. :-)
5 answers