Editing John Locke (section)

== Philosophy ==
[[File:John Locke by John Greenhill.jpg|thumb|left|Portrait of John Locke by [[John Greenhill]] (died 1676)]]
In the late 17th and early 18th centuries, Locke's ''[[Two Treatises of Government|Two Treatises]]'' were rarely cited. Historian [[Julian Hoppit]] said of the book "except among some Whigs, even as a contribution to the intense debate of the 1690s it made little impression and was generally ignored until 1703 (though in Oxford in 1695 it was reported to have made 'a great noise')."<ref>{{cite book|last=Hoppit|first=Julian|authorlink=Julian Hoppit|year=2000|title=A Land of Liberty? England. 1689–1727|location=Oxford|publisher=[[Clarendon Press]]|page=195}}</ref> [[John Philipps Kenyon|John Kenyon]], in his study of British political debate from 1689 to 1720, has remarked that Locke's theories were "mentioned so rarely in the early stages of the [Glorious] Revolution, up to 1692, and even less thereafter, unless it was to heap abuse on them" and that "no one, including most Whigs, [was] ready for the idea of a notional or abstract contract of the kind adumbrated by Locke".<ref name=":0">{{cite book|last=Kenyon|first=John|year=1977|title=Revolution Principles: The Politics of Party. 1689–1720|location=Cambridge|publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]}}</ref>{{Rp|200}} In contrast, Kenyon adds that [[Algernon Sidney]]'s ''[[Discourses Concerning Government]]'' were "certainly much more influential than Locke's ''Two Treatises.''"<ref group="lower-roman">Kenyon (1977) adds: "Any unbiassed study of the position shows in fact that it was Filmer, not Hobbes, Locke or Sidney, who was the most influential thinker of the age" (p. 63).</ref><ref name=":0" />{{Rp|51}}

In the 50 years after Queen Anne's death in 1714, the ''Two Treatises'' were reprinted only once (except in the collected works of Locke). However, with the rise of American resistance to British taxation, the ''[[Two Treatises of Government#Second Treatise|Second Treatise of Government]]'' gained a new readership; it was frequently cited in the debates in both America and Britain. The first American printing occurred in 1773 in Boston.<ref>{{cite ODNB |id=16885 |title=Locke, John (1632–1704) |orig-date=2004 |year=2008 |last=Milton |first=John R.}}</ref> Locke exercised a profound influence on [[political philosophy]], in particular on modern liberalism. [[Michael Zuckert]] has argued that Locke launched liberalism by tempering Hobbesian absolutism and clearly [[separation of church and state|separating the realms of Church and State]]. He had a strong influence on [[Voltaire]], who called him "''le sage'' Locke". His arguments concerning [[liberty]] and the [[social contract]] later influenced the written works of [[Thomas Jefferson]]. One passage from the ''Second Treatise'' is reproduced verbatim in the Declaration of Independence, the reference to a "long train of abuses". Concerning Locke, Jefferson wrote:<ref>{{cite web|date=August 2007|title=The Three Greatest Men|url=https://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/tr11a.html#obj11|access-date=27 June 2018|website=American Treasures of the Library of Congress|publisher=Library of Congress|quote=Jefferson identified Bacon, Locke, and Newton as 'the three greatest men that have ever lived, without any exception'. Their works in the physical and moral sciences were instrumental in Jefferson's education and world view.|archive-date=20 June 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180620153106/http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/tr11a.html#obj11|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|last=Jefferson|first=Thomas|title=The Letters: 1743–1826 Bacon, Locke, and Newton|url=http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/P/tj3/writings/brf/jefl74.htm|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091231231043/http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/P/tj3/writings/brf/jefl74.htm|archive-date=31 December 2009|access-date=13 June 2009|quote=Bacon, Locke and Newton, whose pictures I will trouble you to have copied for me: and as I consider them as the three greatest men that have ever lived, without any exception, and as having laid the foundation of those superstructures which have been raised in the Physical & Moral sciences.}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=Jefferson called Bacon, Newton, and Locke, who had so indelibly shaped his ideas, 'my trinity of the three greatest men the world had ever produced'|url=http://explorer.monticello.org/text/index.php?id=82&type=4|access-date=28 August 2012|work=Explorer|publisher=Monticello|archive-date=12 November 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121112020132/http://explorer.monticello.org/text/index.php?id=82&type=4|url-status=live}}</ref>

<blockquote>[[Francis Bacon|Bacon]], Locke and [[Isaac Newton|Newton]] ... I consider them as the three greatest men that have ever lived, without any exception, and as having laid the foundation of those superstructures which have been raised in the Physical and Moral sciences.</blockquote>

Locke's influence may have been even more profound in the realm of [[epistemology]]. Locke redefined [[subjectivity]], or the ''self'', leading [[Intellectual history|intellectual historians]] such as [[Charles Taylor (philosopher)|Charles Taylor]] and [[Jerrold Seigel]] to argue that Locke's ''[[An Essay Concerning Human Understanding]]'' (1689/90) marks the beginning of the modern Western conception of the ''self''.<ref>{{cite book|author-link=Jerrold Seigel|last=Seigel|first=Jerrold|year=2005|title=The Idea of the Self: Thought and Experience in Western Europe since the Seventeenth Century|location=Cambridge|publisher=[[Cambridge University Press]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|author-link=Charles Taylor (philosopher)|last=Taylor|first=Charles|year=1989|title=Sources of the Self: The Making of Modern Identity|location=Cambridge|publisher=[[Harvard University Press]]}}</ref> Locke's [[Associationism|theory of association]] heavily influenced the subject matter of [[modern psychology]]. At the time, Locke's recognition of two types of ideas, ''simple'' and ''complex''{{mdash}}and, more importantly, their interaction through association{{mdash}}inspired other philosophers, such as [[David Hume]] and [[George Berkeley]], to revise and expand this theory and apply it to explain how humans gain knowledge in the physical world.<ref>{{Cite book |title=A History of Modern Psychology |last=Schultz |first=Duane P. |publisher=Thomas Higher Education |year=2008 |isbn=978-0-495-09799-0 |location=Belmont, CA |pages=47–48 |edition=9th }}</ref> Locke thought the state's borders and the functioning and enforcement of the existence of the state and its constitution were metaphysically tied to "the natural rights of the individual", and this inspired future [[Liberalism|liberal]] [[politician]]s and [[Philosophy|philosophers]].<ref>{{Cite book |title=The Desk Encyclopedia of World History |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]] |year=2006 |isbn=978-0-7394-7809-7 |editor-last=Wright |editor-first=Edmund |location=New York |page=374}}</ref>

===Religious tolerance===
{{See also|Toleration#Locke}}
[[File:John Locke by Richard Westmacott.jpg|thumb|John Locke by [[Richard Westmacott]], University College London]]

Writing his ''[[A Letter Concerning Toleration|Letters Concerning Toleration]]'' (1689–1692) in the aftermath of the [[European wars of religion]], Locke formulated a classic reasoning for [[religious tolerance]], in which three arguments are central:<ref>{{cite book|author-link=Alister McGrath|last=McGrath|first=Alister|year=1998|title=Historical Theology, An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought|location=Oxford|publisher=Blackwell Publishers|pages=214–215}}</ref>

# earthly judges, [[State (polity)|the state]] in particular, and human beings generally, cannot dependably evaluate the [[Truth claim|truth-claims]] of competing religious standpoints;
# even if they could, enforcing a single 'true religion' would not have the desired effect, because belief cannot be compelled by violence;
# coercing [[religious uniformity]] would lead to more social disorder than allowing diversity.

With regard to his position on religious tolerance, Locke was influenced by [[Baptist]] theologians like [[John Smyth (Baptist minister)|John Smyth]] and [[Thomas Helwys]], who had published [[Tract (literature)|tracts]] demanding [[Freedom of thought|freedom of conscience]] in the early 17th century.{{Sfn | Heussi | 1956}}{{Sfn | Olmstead | 1960 | p = 18}}<ref>{{cite journal|author-link=Henri H. Stahl|last=Stahl|first=H.|year=1957|title=Baptisten|language=de|journal=Die Religion in Geschichte und Gegenwart|volume=3|issue=1|at=col. 863}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last=Halbrooks|first=G. Thomas|author2=Erich Geldbach|author3=Bill J. Leonard|author4=Brian Stanley|year=2011|title=Baptists|doi=10.1163/1877-5888_rpp_COM_01472|url=https://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/religion-past-and-present/*-COM_01472|journal=Religion Past and Present|access-date=2 June 2020|isbn=978-90-04-14666-2|archive-date=9 February 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210209175131/https://referenceworks.brillonline.com/entries/religion-past-and-present/*-COM_01472|url-status=live}}.</ref> Baptist theologian [[Roger Williams]] founded the colony of [[Rhode Island]] in 1636, where he combined a [[Democracy|democratic constitution]] with unlimited religious freedom. His tract, ''[[The Bloudy Tenent of Persecution for Cause of Conscience]]'' (1644), which was widely read in the mother country, was a passionate plea for absolute religious freedom and the total [[separation of church and state]].{{Sfn | Olmstead | 1960 | pp = 102–105}} Freedom of conscience had had high priority on the theological, philosophical, and political agenda, as [[Martin Luther]] refused to recant his beliefs before the [[List of Imperial Diet participants (1792)|Diet]] of the [[Holy Roman Empire]] at [[Diet of Worms|Worms]] in 1521, unless he would be proved false by the Bible.{{Sfn | Olmstead | 1960 | p = 5}}

===Slavery and child labour===
Locke's views on slavery were multifaceted. Although he wrote against [[slavery]] in general, Locke was an investor and beneficiary of the slave-trading [[Royal African Company|Royal Africa Company]]. While secretary to the [[Anthony Ashley Cooper, 1st Earl of Shaftesbury|Earl of Shaftesbury]], Locke also participated in drafting the ''[[Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina]]'', which established a quasi-feudal [[aristocracy]] and gave Carolinian [[Planter class|planters]] absolute power over their enslaved chattel property; the constitutions pledged that "every freeman of Carolina shall have absolute power and authority over his negro slaves". Philosopher [[Martin Cohen (philosopher)|Martin Cohen]] observes that Locke, as secretary to the [[Council of Trade and Plantations]] and a member of the [[Board of Trade]], was "one of just half a dozen men who created and supervised both the colonies and their iniquitous systems of servitude".<ref>{{Citation |first=Martin |last=Cohen |title=Philosophical Tales |publisher=Blackwell |year=2008 |page=101}}.</ref><ref>{{Citation |first=James |last=Tully |title=An Approach to Political Philosophy: Locke in Contexts |place=New York |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2007 |page=128 |isbn=978-0-521-43638-0}}</ref> According to American historian James Farr, Locke never expressed any thoughts about his contradictory opinions of slavery, which Farr ascribes to his personal involvement in the [[Atlantic slave trade]].<ref>{{cite journal|last=Farr|first=J.|year=1986|title=I. 'So Vile and Miserable an Estate': The Problem of Slavery in Locke's Political Thought|journal=[[Political Theory (journal)|Political Theory]]|volume=14|issue=2|pages=263–289|doi=10.1177/0090591786014002005|jstor=191463|s2cid=145020766}}.</ref> Locke's positions on slavery have been described as hypocritical, and laying the foundation for the [[Founding Fathers of the United States|Founding Fathers]] to hold similarly contradictory thoughts regarding freedom and slavery.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Farr|first=J.|year=2008|title=Locke, Natural Law, and New World Slavery|journal=[[Political Theory (journal)|Political Theory]]|volume=36|issue=4|pages=495–522|doi=10.1177/0090591708317899|s2cid=159542780}}.</ref>

Historian [[Holly Brewer]] argues that Locke's role in the Constitution of Carolina has been exaggerated and that he was merely paid to revise and make copies of a document that had already been partially written before he became involved; she compares Locke's role to a lawyer writing a will.{{Sfn | Brewer | 2017 | p = 1052}} She states that Locke was paid in Royal African Company stock in lieu of money for his work as a secretary for a governmental sub-committee, and that he sold the stock after a few years.{{Sfn | Brewer | 2017 | pp = 1053–1054}} Brewer likewise argues that Locke actively worked to undermine slavery in Virginia while heading a Board of Trade created by [[William III of England|William of Orange]] following the [[Glorious Revolution]]. He specifically attacked colonial policy granting land to slave owners and encouraged the baptism and Christian education of the children of enslaved Africans to undercut a major justification of slavery{{mdash}}that they were heathens who possessed no rights.{{Sfn | Brewer | 2017 | pp = 1066 & 1072}}

In his ''Two Treatises of Government'', Locke provided a justification for slavery that could never  be met, thus rendering invalid all forms of slavery that existed. Moreover, because slavery is invalid, there is a moral injunction to try to throw off and escape from it.{{Citation needed|date=September 2024}} Locke also supported [[child labour]], which was an intrinsic part of all pre-industrial societies.<ref name="ReferenceA">Diamond, J., The World Before Yesterday</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Thompson |first=E. P. |title=The Making of the English Working Class |publisher=Penguin |year=1968}}{{page needed|date=November 2022}}</ref> In his "Essay on the Poor Law", he discusses the education of the poor; he laments that "the children of labouring people are an ordinary burden to the parish, and are usually maintained in idleness, so that their labour also is generally lost to the public till they are 12 or 14 years old".<ref name=poorlaw>{{cite book|last=Locke|first=John|chapter=An Essay on the Poor Law|title=Locke: Political Essays|editor=[[Mark Goldie]]|location=Cambridge|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=1997a}}</ref>{{rp|190}} Therefore, he suggests the setting up of "working schools" for poor children in each parish in England so that they will be "from infancy [three years old] inured to work".<ref name=poorlaw />{{rp|190}} He goes on to outline the economics of these schools, arguing not only that they will be profitable for the parish, but also that they will instil a good work ethic in the children.<ref name=poorlaw />{{rp|191}}

===Government===
{{See also|Two Treatises of Government}}
{{Republicanism sidebar}}
{{Liberalism sidebar}}
Locke's political theory was founded upon that of [[social contract]]. Unlike [[Thomas Hobbes]], Locke believed that [[human nature]] is characterised by [[reason]] and [[Toleration|tolerance]]. Like Hobbes, Locke believed that human nature allows people to be selfish. This is apparent with the introduction of currency. In a [[State of nature#Locke's view on the state of nature|natural state]], all people were equal and independent, and everyone had a natural right to defend their "life, health, liberty, or possessions".<ref name="locke">Locke, John. [1690] 2017. ''[http://www.gutenberg.org/files/7370/7370-h/7370-h.htm Second Treatise of Government] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191116173303/https://www.gutenberg.org/files/7370/7370-h/7370-h.htm |date=16 November 2019 }}'' (10th ed.), digitized by D. Gowan. [[Project Gutenberg]]. Retrieved 2 June 2020.</ref>{{rp|198}} Most scholars trace the phrase "[[Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness]]" in the [[United States Declaration of Independence|American Declaration of Independence]] to Locke's theory of rights,<ref>{{Citation |last=Zuckert |first=Michael |title=The Natural Rights Republic |year=1996 |publisher=Notre Dame University Press |pages=73–85}}</ref> although other origins have been suggested.<ref>{{Citation |last=Wills |first=Garry |title=Inventing America: Jefferson's Declaration of Independence |location=Boston |publisher=Houghton Mifflin Co |year=2002}}</ref> Like Hobbes, Locke assumed that the sole right to defend in the state of nature was not enough, so people established a [[civil society]] to resolve conflicts in a civil way with help from government in a state of society. However, Locke never refers to Hobbes by name and may instead have been responding to other writers of the day.<ref>{{Citation |last=Skinner |first=Quentin |title=Visions of Politics |place=Cambridge}}.</ref> Locke also advocated governmental [[separation of powers]] and believed that revolution is not only a [[Right of revolution|right]] but an obligation in some circumstances. These ideas would come to have profound influence on the [[United States Declaration of Independence|Declaration of Independence]] and the [[Constitution of the United States]].

==== Accumulation of wealth ====
{{See also|Lockean proviso}}
According to Locke, unused property is wasteful and an offence against nature,<ref>{{Citation |last=Locke |first=John |title=Two Treatises on Government: A Translation into Modern English |year=2009 |publisher=Industrial Systems Research |isbn=978-0-906321-47-8 |page=81 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=S3eB0IgzJjoC&q=John+Locke+unused+property+waste+offence+against+nature&pg=PA81 }}{{Dead link|date=September 2024 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> but, with the introduction of [[Durable good|"durable" goods]], men could exchange their excessive perishable goods for those which would last longer and thus not offend the [[natural law]]. In his view, the introduction of money marked the culmination of this process, making possible the unlimited accumulation of property without causing waste through spoilage.<ref>{{cite web |title=John Locke: Inequality is inevitable and necessary |url=http://www0.hku.hk/philodep/courses/ac/Phil1003-2008/Locke2.ppt |publisher=Department of Philosophy The University of Hong Kong |access-date=1 September 2011 |format=MS PowerPoint |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090509074104/http://www.hku.hk/philodep/courses/ac/Phil1003-2008/Locke2.ppt |archive-date=9 May 2009}}</ref> He includes gold or silver as money because they may be "hoarded up without injury to anyone",<ref>{{cite web |first=John |last=Locke |title=Second Treatise |at=§§&nbsp;25–51, 123–126 |url=http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s3.html |publisher=The Founders Constitution |access-date=1 September 2011 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110911101831/http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch16s3.html |archive-date=11 September 2011}}</ref> as they do not spoil or decay in the hands of the possessor. In his view, the introduction of money eliminates limits to accumulation. Locke stresses that inequality has come about by tacit agreement on the use of money, not by the social contract establishing [[civil society]] or the [[Land law|law of land]] regulating property. Locke was aware of a problem posed by unlimited accumulation, but did not consider it his task. He just implies that government would function to moderate the conflict between the unlimited accumulation of property and a more nearly equal distribution of wealth; he does not identify which principles that government should apply to solve this problem. However, not all elements of his thought form a consistent whole. For example, the [[labour theory of value]] in the ''[[Two Treatises of Government]]'' stands side by side with the demand-and-supply theory of value developed in a letter he wrote titled ''Some Considerations on the Consequences of the Lowering of Interest and the Raising of the Value of Money''. Moreover, Locke anchors property in labour but, in the end, upholds unlimited accumulation of wealth.<ref>{{cite web |first1=Cobb |last1=Cliff |first2=Fred |last2=Foldvary |title=John Locke on Property |url=http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/cobb-cliff-and-fred-foldvary_john-locke-on-property-1999.html |publisher=The School of Cooperative Individualism |access-date=14 October 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120315171711/http://www.cooperativeindividualism.org/cobb-cliff-and-fred-foldvary_john-locke-on-property-1999.html |archive-date=15 March 2012}}</ref>