As we saw in the previous essay on Hobbes, man in his natural state is an anarchist that has no moral or ethical one, does not respect laws, this justifies that the king is an absolutist who takes away all the freedoms to man, achieve peace and order.
For John Locke, Hobbes was wrong, and with good reason. Firstly because it had a pessimistic vision of man. State formation is created for very different purposes What the man did the State? Why such a contract? Locke replied that the state must ensure, in his own words "life, liberty, health, rest of the body and the possession of external things, such as money, land, houses, furniture and the like."
He understands that there is no such thing as perfection. The man in most of the time is a rational, though has emotions and passions overused that may lead you to commit irrational acts. Therefore the welfare state is to guarantee the citizen and to prevent man from being diverted from the right path. You must create the conditions for man to seek happiness. If for a moment you deviate from that path, the state is to reform and punish if necessary. The laws are therefore needed to ensure justice, equality and freedom.
Locke anthropological vision is based on pragmatic view of life. The Man learns through what his senses and then rationalize about it. You do not have preconceived ideas innate. That is, if you believe in God, it at first told him exists and voluntarily chose to believe in him, because he saw it as something good, but not because from birth I knew of its existence. That is, a person who has no basic knowledge of mathematics, may not know how to add or subtract, they are skills you learn in the process of education and socialization. Hence the importance given to Locke that man is a social being that is in contact with his surroundings. Unlike Hobbes, who saw socialization as "a necessary evil"
For Locke the man in his natural state is known to be free and equal, inalienable rights to the state contract. These inalienable rights are four, the first is the right to life. As I own me, the state has no right to dispose of my life, the only one who has that right myself. I'm free, so the government can not persecute or depart for my beliefs, religions, tastes, colors, values, ethics and morals. So if I am, liberal, conservative, Christian, Jewish, Catholic, Huguenot Calvinist, deist, agnostic, or to take this time, proyankie, capitalist, anarchist, social democrat, Social Christian, the state that does not owe interest
As man is laborious, which is his works, the private property is a natural right too. The state has no power to remove man what is rightfully theirs.
The State has an obligation to recognize the natural law that man has at birth. So if a government is not respecting the rights and fundamental freedoms that are untouchable, it is because you are not respecting the contract and the man can, as Locke says "cry to heaven" and rebellion without it being an unlawful act . This is the last of the inalienable rights that we all have.
is important to know that thanks to the contributions of Locke, we have today the declaration of human rights, which have been expanded and improved over time. No doubt Locke is a humanist who saw man, not the devil who had Hobbes, or holy man of Thomas Aquinas, but as it is, with its strengths and weaknesses. Undoubtedly a model that all humans should take into account.
0 comments:
Post a Comment