idealso2
Fri 09/12/08
morten .. more lived lived in morten's house .. kinda like adopted son.
-------
Mon 09/15/08
quotations .. invitatin to be as insightful and ... as possible
1a) .. plato's republic .. establishing the soul-state analogy .. but then deal with exactly what the quotation says
.. is the soul is just two elements?
.. no there's three
general answer is not as good as specific answer
objective essay tests
utopia .. why book 1?
at least two dialgoues between more and nonsense
joining the king's court
private vs communal property - nonsenso argues for communism, but more argues the conventional idea that there's no incentive to work hard .. not efficient
advisor to the king .. could be a little discrete about yor advise .. get him to be less evil
more plays the role of the realist vs the idealistic approach
more really working out his own ideas on these two topics
communal vs private bothered him becuase private is the only way to get incentive, christian ideal more communistic
more could really compartimentalize his thoughts
utopia's attitude is that life is to be enjoyed and that's distinct from humanism ..
- the church did not have a monopoly on the truth .. useful to go back to the greeks, who believed that life on earth is of value .. living a life well is soething to be cherished ..
conventian religious wisdom was "your reward is in heaven"
.. suffering is good for the soul
.. preferable to suffer
more culd compartimentalize his life so much .. know he was a humanist .. but also true .. as far as we can tell, that everyday he wore a hair shirt .. because it makes you suffer .. as pennance .. wore it everday of his adult life
.. and yet he talks about the pleasures of life
another way .. in utopia there's a lot of religious toleration .. almost modern
in more's life, when he was lord chanceller, he signed the dealth warrents for a number of heretics
on one hand, moore the thinker can come up with tolerance, but on the other hand, lives according to his church
also, indirect in his oppostion to henry viii's wanting to divorce his wife. ..
a man for all seasons - about thomas more .. movie about him not wnting to go along with henry viii
self--contradictory man having debates with himself in book one
also accomplishes:
creates , furthers the charade that utopia exists somewhere in the new world
introduces book ii ... makessyou want to hear about the utopia .. like book i of the republic
discussions also revovle aund shortcomings in english society .. executing theives, sheep farmers fencing in land
.. maybe i'd like to hear some better ideas
vailed references to henrey vii who waged war to keep his subjects in line and collected money in nefarious ways
parallel structure with the republic -
nonsenso -- ficticious more like socrates for plato
why didn't this book bother henry vii -- well all the criticism is on henry the vii .. so maybe henry vii took it as vailed praise.
general approach to book 2: this is a kind of book much like republic where the shoclars really differ on what more was trying to do
how do we take this?
throughout the book, more deliberately says something about utopian society that is intended for the careful reader to say "what?" .. going along with things that seem reasonable and then hits you with something really absurd
first moment like that:
page 1 of book 2.
describes geography .. cresant shaped
all these rocks on the inside of the cresant
what about the outside??
.. dismisses the outside in one sentence!
description of how the geography is organized
54 townships .. there were 54 counties in england at the time
each of these townships sends some representatives to a national parliment in aircastle
.. in england they had a parliment in london .. they sent two
.. sounds rather similar
River nowater
tide descritiption .. like the river temms in england.
tidal river
geography of aircastle
river forms one side of the city
another river comes down from the highlands .. freshwater from the center of the city
well defended
detailed description of how the town is organized politically
almost organized like an army
30 households organized by a district controller / styward
for every 20 district controllers, there's Bencheater
total of 6000(?) houses .. 10-16 adults in each house
100,000 adults in this town.
with cildren: .. green bay!
10 bencheaters form a counciil to the mayor
and 200 stywords in charge of 30 households
stywords house is the central cafeteria
whenever someone is presenting an ideal society .. always question .. of economy .. how does it produce enough goods an dservices to provide for th population
how does it decide how to distribute goods and services.
how do you provide enough goods and services to not be in poverty
- two ways
.. convince the reader that the society produces enough goods
.. need is not as great
they need less and can produce more
produce more:
woman working
criminals are slaves
nobles have to work
-- if you look at the way the society is, a lot of sectors areeno producing
.. and occupations that don't seem to produce anything useful
so if you can only produce the essentials . people only have to work 6 hours a day
not requiring as much : houses are one example
not constantly tearing down and rebuilding houses
utopia houses are made fairly solidly and simply
no concept of fassion in clothing
rotated houses every 10 years - avoid the perception of private property
if you live in a house too long, you get too attached .. like it belongs to you.
.. so this is the way they solve the economic question
either that or put it in a place that's really luxurious
efficiency of agriculture: everyone has to do two years o service in agriculture and then then can move back .. if a person really enjoys it, then they can stay longer
people live in these farm houses 40 of them .. each year 20 are replaced .. so there's always 20 who have a year's experience.
they take care of the day to day planting etc
at harvest times: they call the city and get a bunch of people .. in two or three days, we can aarvest all the crops for the year
so fairly efficient way of dealing with agriculture.
people move from house to house
10 -16 adults
what if it does't work out?
move them around!
what?! .. aren't these people related to each other??
what if the township gets too big? move them to another !
if the entire population gets too big, start colonies on mainland
.. find a large area that hasn't been cultivated ... if there's pepple there, they let them join or declare war on the people who are there for not allowing use of uncultivated land. .. another what?!?!
political questions that cme up:
- can't discuss any issue outside the meeting
- cant' discuss an issue you bring up until the next day
- violaters will be killed.
traveling around ..
gotta get a visa to travel to anothher township .. go as a group
like just going to appleton.
and if you violate that, you become a slave!
if you stay overnight you automatically become a contributer to the economy
.. but you on't have to bring anything .. or provide for yourself
you can wander in your individual city
p65 - everyone has their eye on you .. .. constantly being watched to make sure that you play by the rules
make their toilets out of gold .. gold chains on slaves.
value of gold .. completely an agreement among human beings ..
jewelry - frownd upon .. for little kids to play with .. like playing with dolls
identify it as a kid's toy.
story of the diplomats comig to visit
have to do that with the gold .. give it no secret value.
.. kinda a noble lie
religious principles believed in in this society
page 71.
ethical system
religious beliefs at bottom of 71
- every soul is immortal
- we'll be rewarded/punnished for what we do in this world
why should I be good? .. brings in religious concepts
written by a man who read the republic and was impressed by it ..
does he really believe that peple will not do good unless they are punnished by the afterlife?
perhpas more apperciates platos argument but that you need smarts to understand that .. cant use it over masses
social control? what kind of an idea society is that?
a few things to talk about:
discussion of euthenasia
-------
Wed 09/17/08
religion .. almost the last topic -- end of book 2
.. either most important or least important
charactersistics of religion in utopia
.. religious tolerancy services include only general practtices
starts from teh private aspect
only a couple things taht you're obligated to believe
the tolertion only goes so far
but heretics dealt with more humane
all supposed to beliee in afterlife and the idea that how you behaive on earth determins how you'll be treated in the afterlife
.. minimal religion to hold a society together
more is imagining kind of a minimal religions state
mind exercise .. minimal amount of religion .. reqires those too beliefs for social control
organized primarily on the basis of reason rather than revelation
is there a state religion .. there is, but page 104.
all utopian priests .. priests of the society priests of the society
state churches .. generic in the languagge so that it applies to all
why have a state religion .. political control
.. this is the era of devine right of kinds, by the way
in china .. mandate of heaven
for the doctrine of devine right of kings, you have to have religious doctrine to back it.
close alliance between church and state
everbody's kinda embeded in their own place in history ... so maybe more was incapable of conceiving a society where religin and politics are ostenibly separated
idea here : state being totally separate from church was impossible for him to coneive ..
even there, a minimal religion .. and sorta ally to government
page 104.
priests in utopia can excommunicate .. if they violate crimes
and impoverty can be punnished by the civil gonernment
suppose that one of more's motives was to design a soceety based primarily on reason rather than revelation
when they told utopia about christianity, they mostly liked it because of the communial aspect of it .. and commnism has kind of a christian ring to it
lets presume that a society on reason was primarily what he was trying to do
euthanasia: p83
accepted .
suicide is generall frowned up but generall euthanasia "good death" is reasonable
when someone is deathly ill .. no chance of a reasonable life.
when they talk about euthanasia .. in modern times . different forms .. passive euthanasia .. start to withhold medications
non-agressive : take off life support
agressive: actually doo something to make them die . give them a drug
euthanasia has been more frowned upon past the 2nd world war becuase the nazi's used it
in utopia you oould have active euthinasia
page 83 .. Let's face it
supposed to be voluntary euthanasia
this passage .. seems like trying to convince someone to concent
why put so much faith in the priest? acting more like representatives of government
except for one mention of God, it coul have come from a government official rather than a priest
kinda odd!
logical argument? can't work, so they shouldn't reap benefits of working society
medical triage .. when medics go into battlefield .. they have to direct their efforts to those that they think they can save
.. that makes logical sense on the battle field
.. hwne theepatietts are curable they ahve given all the care they can
but if they are no longer treatable, then they get this euthanasia
so this minimizes use of resources .. but we said that Utopia had plenty
.. well but we don't know if the resources are unlimited necessarily
from thh pov of the person talked to :
guilty
offended perhaps
right to die --> duty to die .. slipery slope
but not fearing death .. part of their beliefs
slipery slope part of modern argument too
attempt by more to make this sinister
thorsen: he thought that a society might come up wit a reasonable practice of euthinasia but anticipates that it could go down this slipery slope
.. that's why today .. if there is allowed active euthanasia .. they put in a lot of safe guards to amke sure that the people involved in the decision can't benefit from it in some way
sexual morals and marriage and divorce:
premarital sex: bottom of 83. .. really frowned upon and penalty is pretty draconian
man and women .. displayed naked to each other .. rationale: you gotta check them out!
analogous to cohabitation
what would be the rational for not premarital sex: over population, economic problem
way to keep people more in line
divorce in this society:
and adultry
adultry: in general considered a negative thing on a variety of realms .. hard to see a positive role for it .. obviously against it .. if you do commit adultry: the guilty is committed to celibacy and the other can remarry
for the most part, divorce is not permitted.
occasionally divorce by mutual concent is allowable when both of them have found alternative partners
WHAT?!?!
the way utopians conduct war..
one of the first thing they do .. physchological warfare
.. posters in enemy territory with big rewards for the killing of the generals
page 92
page 93 - sow and foster discord among enemy .. encourage a kings relative to run for the crown
what would prompt them to go to war:
if some country harms another country but not if they've been harmed in some way
off the wall -> page 91.
take a different line if someone is physically harmed by another cuntry or one if it's members
.. every country would be at war right now!
.. that's just crazy!
right at the end of book 2 .. page 112
rafael lecture about communism
says communism is impossible for one simple human characteristic: pride
what is it about human pride that makes this so
human nature .. you'd rather be poor and be richer than somebody else than to be rich along with somebody else
not necessarily rich .. but richer than the other guy.
-------
Mon 09/22/08
Handout -- outline of second treatise by themes.
second handout -- good study questions.
3rd handout .. comparison between political history and intelliectual history in england
generally thinking the 17th centry is characterized by two parall conflicts
king and legislature as to who was preeminant ..
"im the primary judicious force of the country"
beginning to be questions about he source of political authority
.. devine right of kings
protestantism .. and questioning of political authority of kings .. remeeber the alignment of catholic church and political power.
17th centry .. this is an important issue
the other main issue that was ging on was protestanism vs catholicism .. remember that in 1534, henry viii created the church of england .. one of the first events in the protestant movement
so ostensibly the churhc of england was the church of englahd, but a lot of suspician that th stewardts retained catholic sympathy.
parallel conflict .. between king and legislature and the protestantism vs roman catholicism
if we turn to the inteelectual history, we begin o see the parall between that and english history.
patriarcha .. locke is a little bosessed with countering robert filmer
first treatise was a point by point refutation of patriarcha.
keep in mind that patriarcha was intended to justify charles i's right to rule .. defense of devine right of kings.
but pariarcha was not published until much later until 1680 .. only a few years before locke writes his treatises .. so that's probably why he was obsessed with the book and trying to refute it.
locke was in favor of the parliment being supreme and protestantism
.. scared james ii away .. and this goup of people came in to take over .. with the stipualtion that parliment would be the supreme authority .. and that's the government aht england has today .. essentially
the glorius revolution
middle of the centry . chrles i was beheaded in london in 1649 and for a ime there was no monarcy anymore .. for a few years they were fumbling around trying to decide how to reconstrct english govenrment
and that's when hobbs writes leviathan
HObbs wants to bring back the stewart dynasty .. justify it on a new group .. the social contract .. same concept that locke uses but locke comes to completely different conclusions
social constract .. essential ingredients:
- state of nature
- law of nature
- original political authority in all people
state of nature is no goverment but there is a law of nature
but there has to be a reason why we want to repllce the state of nature by a political society .. that then explains why political society is created out of nothing - tranfer the political authroity they each had to a person who has the political authority
so difference from devine right of kings .. power rises up instead of down from on high
rememberr hobbs has a political agenda .. he wants charles ii to become absolute knng .. so in leviathan the conclusion he reaches is that the people are compelled to transfer all the political authority to a single person and they no longer have aay right to take it away .. so he uses osical contract theory to defend abolute rule .. twists philosophy to make it fit political agenda ..
hobbs conculsions just don't seem as longical as lockes' .. but elocke was also operating from an agenda .. so that agend colors the way he writes about goverrment .. power is not irrevocable
locke is often thought of as a democrat but he's not really .. his construct he says could be anything
..; becomes the guru of the founding fathers .. declaration of independance and later the constitution
locke's two treatises are essentially motivated by political cercomstances .. anonimously written .. only admitted to have written them on his death bed .. written in ourder to justify the glorious revolution .. so patriarcha was a dangerous document
locke writes these things as the reulst of a plitical agenda and the the american agenda was the result of these ideas
so you see both ways here.
we did have a restouration of the monarchy in 1660
but gbetween that oliver cromwell who spearheaded the revolutooin eventually became a military dictator .. must have terrified hobbs who wrote leviathan .. could be used to justify cromwell
son richard took over and gave up . so then 1660 restouration charles ii
suceeded by james ii
first chapter.
patriarcha .. "the father"
refutation of fillmer
"god gave the world to adam"
adam passed it on to his offspring --> single person? .. well then there would be just one person on earth
so how did we get to this state foom th original point
so the present kings ruled by inheritance ultimately from god
so locke tries to show logical wholes of that theory.
even if adam's herrs had authority .. do we even know tha the heirs are the ones in charge right now
no reason to belive that at this point the ones that hold political power are the ones that still hold it.
devine right of kings .. sorta a charade
going to borrow the social contract foom hobbs but arrive at different conclusion.
chatper ii - of the state of nature
. concept of human beings living on earth w/o any political authority .. a lot of people today say that this is not the way things actually happened .
but you can think of it as an axium for political theory .. locke claims that this is historically true .. but says even today the sovereign leaders of the world are in a state of nature with respect to each other.
.. there's no ultimate authority over the individual nations .. the un is an umbrrella organizaton but does not really hav the force of political authority
state of nature from locke:
only takewhat you need - that's the law of nature .. even in the state of nature there is a law.
in general: certain inherit rights in the state of nature but
we own ourselves and we have a right to our indiviudal liberty .. right to live our lives as we see fit .. subject to the alw of nature .. which says htat everyone esle has this right .. so we can't prevent others from living their life the way they want to
the way locke describes the law of nature is that even if there were not usch thing sas the bible, we intuitively have this understanding of the law of anture .. unless we're mentally deranged
we all have a sense of fairness .. "that's just not fair"
intuative notinn of faarness imparted by god onto our individual psychology
historically it is then reinforced by christian scripture but exists even before the revealed word .. that people could live in the stte of nature and udnerstand the general rules
mos people therefore are fiarly nice people .. completely different from hobbs
hobbs state of nature everyone at everyone's threat ..
locke's state of nature .. much more benign ..
human beings are by nature reasonably nice people .. most people want to be fair
can see how you can come to different conclusions based on state of natures .. hobbs .. state so aweful that they would do anythig to eliminate fear of safetly --> create absolute ruler to protect them
not the motivation of the state of nature for locke
.. things work OK but there are inconveniences
such as : everyody wants to be fair but every party in that equation is biased in their own interest .. everyone sees fairness with colored glasses .. even though there might be a law of nature and fairness, two people interpret it differently
when in the state of nature, when somebody violates it, everyone has an obligation to enforce the law of nature
getting paid back -- only person who can get that is the person who was injured
but there's an inconvenience there too -- we as individuals are faarly weak .. don't have the ability as individuals to enforce the law of nature .. tendancy to band together ..
political society -- ommon authroity above individuals where you can decide disagreements
and you ahve a force poweful enough so that when they decidethye can execute it .. and mmke sure people caa abide by that decision
the state of war. chp 3
HObbs .. state of war= state of nature
in locke . state of war when person a decides to violate the rights of person b .. ignore the law of nature have created the state of war
whenn peple don't follow the law of nature intentially they are creating a state of war
in that state of war, you have the right to retaliate
chapter 4. slavery
a valid reason -- person who was in a state of war can be controlled by the reservers of the law of nature
cahpter 5. - intersting .. first argument that we get in favor of private property that we've seen in this class
wants to justify private property and yet we're in the state of nnture .. all we really have that we own is our lives and our labor .. what we can do with our bodies
foom taht he has to justify private property
idealic view of the state of nature .. god has given everything in common
how do you get from that situation to having private property
idea that we won our labor and when we appropriate soemthng .. we are now mixing our labor .. that apple now belongs to me
part of the law of nature .. when we appropriate stuff for our use we're not supposed to appropriate more than we can use even if there is plenty for everything else
why don't we no longer follow this? money . durable .. because of the invention of money , I can picc 1000 apples, sell 950 of them and get money for them
because of money , we've gotten away from the idea of taking only what we can reasonably use
real life examples:
fishing - in a sense all the fish are in common
.. that's my fish; i caught it!
another example: - baseball fowl ball
change from common to private can be instantaneous
nice mechanism to morally justify private property
says labor makes things valous .. based on a labor-intensive production system . lack of machines
wealth primarily created by labor
wed duquette
friday no class but first essay due.
-------
Wed 09/24/08
Locke
august 29th 1632
born
educated at home until about 14 .. then sent to westminster school
had a typical eduation for those who actually had the opportunity to go to school
studied the classics .. greek language and thought and philosophy and culture
.. latin .. romans
very traditional
historically oriented
despite that very traditional education, locke's inclinnations were very modern
became very interested intthe schicnce that was developing during this time
development of the schinces really went against the grain of classical thought .. experimental science rather than pure reasoning
in particular attracted to tthe research of robert boyle .. an early chemist
locke studied medicine
sometime in the early 1660's .. became interested in phiolosophy .. reading the works of decartes
philospher and scientist ..
method in schience to method of truth
developed analytical geometry as well as a philosopher
that's what is intersting about hhis time .. the mst philosphers are connected to the new science thht's developing .. whether like llocke with chemmistry .. or hobbs .. with math
locke more interested in experimental science
.. did get some license to practice but did not become a regular practicing physician
got involved in politics .. politics in england was dynamic .. to put it mildly ..
when locke was 10 years old, the civil war broke out in england .
1649 .. the king was executed and we had this onog battle between the wigs .. supporting the power of parliment
vx the tories and royalists supporting the power of the king
the king and th royalty and the parlimettarians were in ongling conflict
we have that debate but in a relatively civil way .. but in egnland there really was a violent civil conflict
locke worked under shaftberry the parlimentarian
when things reaaly got vilent people sought exile or they would have been executed
the popular palce to get exiled to was holland and locke followed there shortly
1668 -- glorious revolution .. the stewards vying for ontrol of the monarchy
very fast protest / revolution where they wre kicked out and willlima and mary of orange ended up taking th throne
.. basis for a enw constitution that recognized the supremacy of parliment
.. later kngs and queens in england become symbolic
so eventually locke came back
what's intersting is how locke's conception of government convforms to the practical political struggle that was taking place .. he articulates a conception of government muhc like what hh wigs were trying to intitite
a givernment that would not reign absoutley .. but conditionally .. on the basis of concent and whol's authority was accountable .. accoutnablility was part of that
.. not doing the job .. can be kicked out .. executive is now an employee of hte people
hooker is a precursor with locke
hooker was an anglican priest who was involved in a debate on the justification of the setting up of the church of englandd.. and hookers claim was that the estabilishment of the churhc of england had a rational base to it .. not just in terms of religious points .. but one could understand it rationally
and there was a n apeal in hoooker as to how the law of nature has a kind of morla and rational character to it .. and if we're foloowing it carefully, we are developing our society that is both moral and rational
locke takes that idea from hooker .. and really emphasizes how the law of nature guides us as individuals
.. extent to which each and every one of us as individuals is ca ...
we are not to be governed like children like filmer .. subjugated
locke says that's not political rule .. and says that that traditional notion of the family isn't even right.
but syas that political rule as nohhnng to do with the family .. its' based on concent and limited rule and for a certain purupose . the oommon good
so the context is very different
the first treatise is the point by point refutation of filmer
2nd treatise!
is locke presenting an ideal society . and wwat really is an ideal society
can we actually aave something ideal that exists?
ideal societies vs utopias--> model sof society that cannot be replicated
are ideal societies and uptopian society
locke's clearly not presenting a utopian idea of government .. so seems to think it's realizable
.. maybe thought that it had happened with the revolution
poobably draws on what's happening at the time
locke's conception of gveronment is sorta the parlimentary republic
not democracy .. conception by a republic (law is authority) .. people at least represented .. goverjment accoutnable
legislature is the supreme ..
represents the people -- doesn't tell us how the representatives are set up
.. probably didnt think in terms of one person per vote
executive will be limited .. but not a careful division and balance of powers .. that comes out of french thought .. you won't find it in locke
in locke the idea tha tyo have these distinct powers and they aave different functions and one shoul not rry to do the foucio of the other.
fundamental concepts in locke
human nature
state of nature
social contract
civil society
also, rebellion / revolution
concept of human nature -- very opitmistic - humans are fundamentally moral and rational beings
and we recognized that about orselves . and we recognize that i' moral and rational and so are others
and we each have rights and duties
and there are moral and rational rights and duties
what locke does wit the state of nature is use that for articulating what the rights and duties for peopl who tend to be in a natural condition .. state of nature .. not a primative state
.. but when he hypothesizes he state of nature, he's thinking of individuals that are fairly sophisticated
state of nature for locke .. the american wastern frountier .. were not social insittutins .. mostly jjust families
are enighbors .. some distance away
but no government at all .. no national and local ..
you wouldn't even have a church of any sort
indiviudals living on our own
there are tranactional relationships but they fall short of being institutinalized
and supposes that hhe individuals are God fearing
.. why would it have to be monotheistic .. etc
really loks very christian .. that's begging the question a bit of you assume that those in the state of nature have that understanding
argues that at some point that would have to happen .. a moral recognition of themselves
and realize the need for a larger social network that's created.
right .. not just something that you aave for yourself .. othrs have to bbe capable of recognizing it .. or you don't really have it
duties are also individual but those fduties can only e understood trhough others
we have duties to one anothe inthe state of nature
limits on the righhs imply duties
don't take too much
- spoilage
- should be something for others
right to individual property is a right .. way of appropriating what's been given to evrbody
and if anybody's exculuded , the their right is ineffective
clearly assuming a surpluse of resources
thoe limitations imply a duty
towrd others .. not to take so much that others can't have oome too
duty to preserve others
golden rule built in to us.
good samaritan implied here
.. the limit of your duty might be your own self -preservation but when it's not difficult .. when it's easy to help someone out and theyre in dire need, you have an obligation
moral obligation .. not unlimied .. not obligated so far taat we would deprive ourself
not obligated to do soemthing that they could do
good samaritan rule does't seem to aply as obviously to the gov level
state of nature . exhibits the optimistic idea of humans
hobbs .. says we start out in a state of war
lockke says a state of nature is not a state of war but not at state of peace exactly either
more or less get along but always the pssibility of conflict .. the inconveniences of the state of nature
. source :right to judge when others violate your rights
but who enforces the alw of nture .. left to every individual
what's the problem with this diea .. when everyone is the judge .. gets chaotic .. not because locke is now pessemistic
its the very fact that you oon't have institutional structures tht will allow things to escalate
different perceptions of who's at false but everyone is judge and enforcer
so the worry would be that you oul end up with the hatfields and mecorsy scenario -- families in intesne and violence conflict with one another .. each of them thinking that theyre carrying out the law of nature .. becuase the other side is at fault
that's the inconvenicne of the state o nature
gonna lead to confusion and chaos
we regonize taht -- that will lead us to decide to set up society and government
gov33nrment .. to protect LIFE & LIBERTY as well as posessions
so we get toegthr .. intially no society
on what basis wil the community setup .. first and foremost by the will of the majority
for initial and all furhher decisions
in a sense the intial decision to form a community is unanamous .. don't have to participate in this
they who don't join are still under the law of nature .. and they are vulnerable because they don'' have the protection of the society
second step is to set up government
difference between someone who lives ou tin the wilderness and prefers to live that way ... and the people in the town
.. so the person from wildersoness comes into this town without legal rights .. they don't hae access to what everyone in the town has
.. allows to pass through but your status means that you're here on a temporary basis .. not going to profit from the community when you haven't agreed to be pprt of it
thinks thattmost people will see the advantages of a community
but while theyre in the twon, they in a sense have given tacet concent
the alien would lack significant benefit of the double because they wouldn't have for exaple habius corpus
all of this is concent..ansferring not all of your rights but some of them to goverrment and locke talks about this in a coupoe of different ways
says that when we set up a political authority, we're setting up somebody who will make decisions
.. saaing that it's the poer of judge ment about whether th alw has been fiolated .. put in the hands of a common authority
not giving our right to property ..etch .. but we are giving up the ri