로크의 자연론(영문)

소개글

John Locke begins with a questionable assumption that individuals were “already” property owners in primitive times. How reasonable is this assumption? Elaborate Locke’s theory of state without using the problematic assumption, while using his logic fully. In other words, you need to imagine and theorize what happens to Locke’s theory when you reject the assumption that individuals were “already” property owners from the beginning.

로크의 자연론에 대한 해석을 나름의 생각으로 정리한 글. 영문
고려대학교 정치외교학과 세계의 정치체제 중간 문제

목차

없음

본문내용

John Locke assumes that people were property owners in primitive ages. The assumption is the first and main factor, which links the other assumptions to make sense of the theory. Locke believed that God allowed people to own whatever he want by labor within his capability. But what if we ignore the assumption?

Let us imagine primitive life without any property concept. They need to get some natural things to live. But there is no rule to own something and they don’t know what belonging means. So they just get whatever they want to live. If they face someone who wants what they got, they would defend them and fight against the enemies. But people’s right and desire are not confined to ‘natural right to use force to protect property’.

참고 자료

없음