Two Treatise of Gov: Examining Filmer's Patriarcha Theory

Two Treatise of Government is categorized into the First Treatise and Second Treatise. In the First Treatise, Locke criticized Robert Filmer's perceptions of Patriarcha that supported the king's divine rights. Locke disputed Filmer's perspective since his theory claimed that everyone was born a slave to specific persons that are inherent kings. Locke refuted the concept since he believed that everyone could govern themselves virtuously based on God's commandments. Consequently, he analyzed Filmer's opinions by contesting his claims from the scripture to ridicule Filmer's views as irrational. Locke claimed that no form of government could be associated with the speculations on the divine right of kings. In the Second Treatise, Locke focused on proposing effective solutions to the political turmoil in England. The Second Treatise outlined the philosophy of civilization and property. Locke claimed that legitimate governments were characterized by people's consent. As a result, any government that undermined peoples' freedom should be overthrown. The Two Treatise of Government laid the foundation for the United States' Constitution and the modern systems of democracy endorsed by different nations.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Locke's Main Ideas

"First Treatise"

Filmer's Patriarcha proposed the ideology of the divine right of kings associated with monarchy government that had been endorsed by most of the traditional political systems. However, in the First Treatise, Locke opposed the ideas in Patriarcha by challenging the theological evidence that Filmer used to support his proposition. Moreover, Locke claimed that if society endorsed Filmer's views, it could lead to absurdity and slavery. He chose to refute Filmer's thesis due to his reputation and determination to authenticate the opinions in Patriarcha. Filmer's text advocated for a hereditary and absolute monarchy system. Filmer claimed that according to the Bible, Adam was granted unlimited power as a father over his offspring and the authority was passed down through the descendants (Locke, 1690). However, Locke refuted the claims on various grounds. He argued that acknowledging that fatherhood bestows authority would be applicable only through siring. Hence, power could not be transferred to one's offspring through procreation since it is only God who creates life. Likewise, a father's authority over his children is not outright contrary to Filmer's allegations. Locke asserted that the parenting role was a joint responsibility between parents as outlined in several scriptures in the Bible.

Filmer claimed that Adam's absolute power arose from his ownership over the universe. Locke disputed the allegation by declaring that the world was initially held in common. Even if it was not, God granted Adam dominance over brute animals and land, but not people. Additionally, Adam and his descendants could not exploit the power to enslave human beings since the law of nature forbade the humiliation of other people to a desperation state (Locke, 1690). Therefore, if one is granted authority, they should utilize it properly to ensure that their welfare and that of their colleagues is catered to effectively. Locke claimed that even if such virtuous deeds were not commanded in the scriptures, it was a viable strategy to gain dominion upon which the government was founded on its subjects' consent.

In the First Treatise, Locke projected that the principle of the divine right of kings would lead to the collapse of all forms of governments. Consequently, Locke suggested that if Filmer's claims were correct, the world would have one rightful heir from Adam's lineage who would be the king (Locke, 1690). Since it was virtually impossible to ascertain Adam's true heir, then no government could be formed from Filmer's principles. Hence, Filmer should have substantiated why men should have to be duty-bound to oblige to their rulers.

Locke finalized the First Treatise by evaluating biblical history and the chronological accounts of the World. He concluded that Filmer's hypothesis lacked critical evidence that could affirm his allegations. Besides, Locke purported that no ruler had ever acknowledged that their authority was linked to their descent as a rightful heir of Adam (Locke, 1690). Locke further claimed that it was Filmer who was the political reformer and not the individuals who articulated for their freedom and natural equality. He described the government as a social invention structured to protect the liberty to personal property. According to Locke (1690), rulers had a duty under the moral, divine, and natural law to cater to all of their subjects' needs. Locke's explanation on the society's responsibility was based on the principle rule of doing good deeds to others as one could expect them to reciprocate with similar deeds. Although there are several accounts from philosophers, no political thinker has ever provided a more obvious and simpler explanation comparable to Locke's views.

"Second Treatise"

In the Second Treatise, Locke described political power as the liberty to make rules that prioritized protection and regulated property ownership. Locke believed that rules are applicable only when the subjects endorsed them since they were good to the society. Nonetheless, Lock claimed that all societies were in an original state of nature. A person in an original state was influenced by the rules of nature, but they could act, live, and dispose of their possessions as they deemed fit (Locke, 1690). Subjects had the duty to protect each other's interests since they were all equal before God. Similarly, people had the responsibility of punishing individuals who transgressed against God's commandments and intended to harm others by compromising their possessions, liberty, or life.

Locke outlined the difference between a state of war and a state of nature. A state of nature was depicted by people living harmoniously and governed by logic without any common superior influence. Conversely, a state of war was characterized by people being subjected to excessive force from rulers who interfered with their natural freedom and rights without the people's consent. Consequently, the main difference between war in nature and war in society relied on when the chaos would end. In society, wars ended when the excessive force had been withdrawn. After the withdrawal of excessive force, the conflicting parties sought the help of a common authority to intervene and resolve their past injustices (Laslett, 1956). However, in nature, the war did not culminate unless the aggressors endorsed peace and offered to rectify any damage incurred. For that reason, Locke claimed that people opted to form a society to evade the state of war.

Locke defined the purposes of property from a biblical and logical perspective. For instance, Locke considered the earth as a unique property that human beings had to utilize for their mutual benefit and survival, but Locke recognized personal property. The private property existed if there were specific guidelines that regulated the possession of assets. Locke stated that the best philosophy on the right to ownership was entrenched on the notion that everyone owned their body and all the tasks they performed using their body (Locke, 1690). Hence, when one added their physical labor on a foreign material or object and the resultant products became their property. Locke delineated labor as a central factor that stipulated the property value that made the world more fulfilling and efficient to all people. Locke further clarified that money satisfied the need for a perpetual measure of value in a trading method that was linked to labor and property.

The Second Treatise expressed the fundamental views that Locke had on human nature. Locke contended that specific problems usually arose in a state of nature, for instance, some individuals would consistently cause conflicts with others, steal from others, and provoke people aggressively. Nevertheless, Locke believed that persons could reason to determine an appropriate and moral path. He asserted that people were sensible enough to establish their best interests. Such rational beliefs are crucial universal abilities that are required to remedy conflict in civil governments. Locke believed that persons created governments and societies voluntarily across the globe since the governments provided stability and protection that a state of nature lacked (Locke, 1690). Locke asserted that upholding personal freedom was an integral component of proper governance. As a result, the government should focus on the personal and commonwealth interests most of the time.

In the Second Treatise, Locke expressed his political ideas on property and the liberty to private property ownership. Initially, Locke was hesitant about discussing explicitly the significance of the property. But, once he analyzed the value of property ownership, it became the key aspect of his governance model. Locke declared the main reason that inspired individuals to jointly form societies was to ensure that they safeguarded their assets. People were willing to forego some of their liberties to the government since individuals possessing property required a central authority that protected their assets (Locke, 1690). But, the perception excluded persons without property. Even though Locke's views were radical, they have been criticized at times from lacking advocate for equal rights for non-landowners and landowners alike.

Locke advocated for the people's right to revolt against leaders who oppressed them. Additionally, Locke advocated for the division of power between the legislature and executive and ensured that they co-existed independently to act as regulators (Laslett, 1956). Locke claimed that if a ruler infringed the subjects' rights, the people should overthrow such leaders and replace them. Likewise, in case the legislature does not cater to the people's interests, it had to be dissolved, and the subjects had to select a governance system that they thought would suit their needs.

The Second Treatise focused on advocating for the implementation of majority rule as a viable form of governance. Locke classified three essential elements required in a civil society: the legislature, the executive, and the judiciary. He articulated for a government that had different branches. According to Locke (1690), an ideal government should be characterized by a resilient legislature and a dynamic executive that ensured that the legislature does not undermine the judiciary. In the Two Treatises of Government, Locke outlined the conditions that would lead to the formation of a new government. For example, once the rulers could not cater to the needs of their society, the government had to be replaced, overthrow or dissolved. When the government had been overthrown, the citizens were at liberty to form a civil state that prioritized their interests. Therefore, Locke insisted that the approach minimized rebellion and random unrest since it permitted subjects to modify their laws and the legislature without using any force.

Strengths and Weakness of Locke's Arguments

Locke's Theory of Property

Lock believed that based on the state of nature all people were born equal and free. Such freedom empowered individuals to use their logic to influence their decisions without being compelled. There were no political authorities to oblige people to adhere to specific guidelines. Locke acknowledged that such liberty did not license people to offend their colleagues since the law of nature regulated the freedom everyone had, and they had to obey it. Even though Locke did not provide detailed information on the law of nature, he provided comprehensive coverage on some of its specifics (Locke, 1690). Firstly, Locke outlined the logic that the law of nature...