Philosophy of Natural Rights According to John Locke

110 Pages·2016·7.02 MB·English

by  Mark Francis Hurtubise

Loyola University Chicago
Loyola eCommons
Master's Theses Theses and Dissertations
1952
Philosophy of Natural Rights According to John
Locke
Mark Francis Hurtubise
Loyola University Chicago
Recommended Citation
Hurtubise, Mark Francis, "Philosophy of Natural Rights According to John Locke" (1952).Master's Theses.Paper 1057.
http://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_theses/1057
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in
Master's Theses by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please [email protected].
This work is licensed under aCreative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License.
Copyright © 1952 Mark Francis Hurtubise
PHILOSOPHY OF NATURAL RIGHTS
ACCOltDING TO JOHN LOCKE
by
IJ!ark Francia Hurtubise. S.J.
A Thesis Subrnittad to the Faculty of the Graduate School
of Loyola University in Partial of
~lrillment
the Requirements for the Degree of
of Arts
r:;~a5ter
June
1952
LIFE
Mark F. Hurtubise, 3.J., was born in Ohica.go, Illinois,
November 16, 1919. He completed his elementary eduoation at
St. Ignatius Grammar 30hool, and in June, 1937 was graduated
t
from Loyola Acad$mY, Chicago, Illin01s. He attended the
Jowntown College of Loyola University during the years 1938-
1941.
In August. 1941, he entered the Society of Jesus, at
{'lilford, Ohio. He enrolled in the undergraduate school of
Xavier University, and in June, 1945, he received a degree
1n Batchelor of Literature.
In August, 1945, he began his philosophical studies at
•
Baden College, Baden, Indiana, and was enrolled in
~Jest ~,est
the graduate school of Loyola University.
During the years of 1948.1951, he taught at St. Ignatius
High School, Chicago, Illinois. In June, 1951. he returned
to '"lest Baden College, to begin the study of theology.
1ii
..
TABLE OF CONT ZHTS
Chapter Page
. . . . .
.
I. INTRODuc'rloN .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. • • 1
Introductory reasons for studying Lockets
Theory--Outline ot thesis--Biography ot
John Locke.
II. BACKGROUND tro ON CIl1IL .. ..
TR~TISES GOVERNM~T.
Political and historical background-
Absolutism ot English k1ngs--Thaory of
James I on divine right of k1ngs--Locket s
criticism ot this theory as it is proposed
by Filmer.
III. LOCKE ON NA'lURAL LAW • .. .. .. • .. • • • .. .. • 16
• •
Locke's concept of the state of nature-
The place in it tor his concept ot natural
law-.Looke's theory of natural law as com
pared to that of Hobbes.
.
IV .. LOCKEt S PHILOSOPHY OF NATUfu\L RIGHTS·. .. •
.. ..
Lockets doctrine as presented in the
second an explanation ot
T£aat~s!--F~rst
the doctrine In general. then in particular
---The three main natural rights which Locke
treats are life. liberty, and property-
Emphasis given to right of property because
of the peculiar place it holds in Locke's
doctrine.
1"
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Page
. .
V. EVALUATION OF LOCKl!.:'S DOCTRINE .. .. .. .. .. 64
F.1rst a brief statement ot Lockets main
phl1osophy--Demonetration of Locke's
inadequate philosophical basis tor doctrine
on natural rlghts. .... Seeondly a criticism
according to soholastic philosophy of Lookets
doctrine on natural rights in general·
Criticism of specific rights of lite,
liberty, and property. .
. .
D1 BLIOGRAP HI • • • .. • • .. • • .. • .. .. 101
.. .. ..
v
CHAPTER I
IN'l'RODUCTlCU
Today many nations of the earth are being enslaved by
deologles which glorlty the state and trod upon the individual.
eny1ng completely all God-given rights. The subject of natural
ights therefore, 1s of great importance. It 1s as 1rnportant as
an is himself. Two cent.urles ago, the writers of the American
onst1tut1on thought natural r1ghts so important that they took
hem as a .founding principle. Thomas Jefferson, ths· C:11.thor ot
he Declaration of Independence. 1s said to have been greatly
nfluenced by the writings of John Locke on the subjeot of
1
atuFdl rights. Four fundamental political ideas, the doctrine
r natural law and natural rights. the compact theory of the
.
,
tate, the doctrine of popular sovereignty, and the right ot
evolution against an unjust govemmtllt., are all fotmd in the
2
ecl.clratlon much in the phraseology of John Locke. However,
19',. ,1.
Charle. Maurice Wil.tse, Ih, 'J,f'fs£sgn1y Tx:ad&tipD
........~ ~~~w· a:ur.c~·lI\ilIIOolIIot Chapel Hill.
Harbison. The '
~~~~SW~~~~~~~~WL~~~~ug~f I~ork,
1
2
it would be extremely difficult and certainly beyond the scope
of a master's thesis to prove the influence of John Locke on
'rho_a Jeffersen, Whether John Locke was the main influence. or
merely a minor influence. he is cited and popularly thought to
be one of the classical \'iritera on the theory ot natural rights,
'fhereton, it i8 certainly worth our while to make a ,study of
his doctrine on natural rights as it appears in hie 'Eteat,i5!l!1
on C~vU G2veitPll~a1i.
As every great po11t1cal movement in history finds a
defender in the writings of either a philosopher or a histOrian,
so the Goming of William and lIJ.ary to the throne of England
found lts dei'endQrau f.iacaulay in his H&sto£l 2& E.QU.'Id, and
J OM Locke in his T,£ea:ti&ill 2D CI:X&l Osn:eam\. To defend the
ftglorioua revolution of 16g8". Locke had to show that man had
certain nat,ural. ri&hts, among which was the right to revolt
against a despotic king.. Two main adversaries of Locke on
~is
point were James If who defended tbe theory of the diVine right
.
,
of kings, aa4. Tbomas Hobbes, who held the theory of abaolut$
sovereignty. Tbeae two writers became the target ot Looke'_
atta.k in hi. two 'tI!lt1§!!1 9J! ail&. QgVGtQIiIU.
The first of the two ksti-J!I. 1s important only in so
far as tone divine right of kings theory 18 opposed to the theory
of natural rights, especially popular sovere1gnty. Therefore,
.
in the first chapter of our thesla. we shall briefly con.1der
\
the d1v1ne right theory, as proposed by James!, a.nd Locketa
. .
,
criticism of ,_. The seeond however, 18 ot great
Trs!~'s..
imponance for 1t contain. the whole of Lock.t • theory on nat
ural rights. As a basis for his theory. Locke uses the state
of nature and naturdl law. Our aecond 6apter will consider
these two Qoncepts and compare Looke'. ftewpoint with that of
Hobbes, the unnamed adv$rsary of the seoond IEeAtisl- In the
third chapter, we shall make a 1;extual GpOtd.tion of Locke ••
philosophy of natural r1gbts, i'1rst 1n general, then ion part-i-,
~ ~ ~ I-
cular, considering three matn rights, life, liberty, a.nd. private
property. In the final chapter we shall briefly conslde,r
Locke s main philosopbJin order to show that Locke had no
f
philosophical basis for a natural righta th.orr. The remainder
of the chapter will be a oritlcism according to scholasti.o
doctrine of Locka •• "common sense" philosophy on natural right• •
Ufe of John Locke
John Locke waa born on th~ 29th ot August, 1632, at
.' '~' ~.~
Wrlngton. a slBf;!11 town near Bristol, in England. At the age of
fourteen he entered School. It was in this year
Wes~m1nster
wa.
that a flerce struggle between King aDd Parliament raging.
In 1652 Locke was elected to a junior studentshlp at Christ
hurch, Oxford. Sere he acquired. his Mastert 8 degree. Locke
.
remained at the University tor eight years. After dabbling in
diplomacy for a time, Locke began the study ot medicine.) Ue
was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society in November, 166a.
Two years preViously Locke first met Lord Ashley,
,
afterwards Earl ot Shaftesbury_ Locke admired Ashley, one ot the
.
,
most influential lXl8n in the count~, while Ashley t on his slde,
recogni.ed the learning and wisdom ot the young man.4 From the
middle of 1667 onwards Locke became one of Ashley' a adV'1sors.
and to live with him in London, where he served in the cap
we~t
acit.y ot private physicia~. • 5
Probably at this time. Locke beg;ln seriously to con.
t
sider political ideas. In April, 1672, Ashley was ral~ed to the
peerage as .Earl of Shaftesbury. Locke also received greater
dutiea, for he was appointed. Secretary for the Preservation of
. .
Benefices. 'l'h1s effice he held for- a little over a year, and
then was appointed Secratary to the of Trade and Planta
C~ur~"~i"
tions. But by 1615 1118 health was so bad that he was forced to gO
to France tor a rest. There he remained tor lour years, travel
ing about the country. He then returned to Londo~ to 'find the
14'.
3. H. R. Fox Bourne, 2t John: lteslil. London.
1876, I. 194.
4. R. I. Aaron, JoAn L2elsSh London, 1931, 16.
5. Boun• • .LU:!. I. 198.
country filled \v1th political unrest. He l~ved at London or
OXford tor tt'iO years, during which time he Wcl.S in and out of
royal lavor along with hi$ patron. Finally Shaftesbury was'
compelled to flee the country to Holland ~{here in 166) he died,
- ,
,miga. In 16gg the plans tor revolution came to a head. and
,11111am lett .for England 1n November. By February the revolution
, .
~ad been earried out peaoefully. so \ that Locke CQuld. return to
t!:niland. in the company of Lady Ivlordaunt and .Princess of Orange,
now to be Queen Mary ot England.