Subsequently, Hume's argument focuses on human testimony and the hesitation that mankind feels regarding the credibility of others' statements. He states that this hesitation stems from the "…Opposition of contrary Testimony; from the Character or Number of the Witnesses; from the Manner of their delivering their Testimony; or from the Union of all these Circumstances." The testimony from human beings is therefore not accepted by the rest of the population as free from doubt or questioning.
Rousseau and Locke differ in many ways. Rousseau creates a utopian society designed to give all men equal representation under the law. Rousseau claims that from Civil Liberty man gains "what is called Moral Liberty which alone makes him master of himself; for the impulse of appetite is slavery, while obedience to a law which we prescribe to ourselves is liberty" (Rousseau, P.196). In the state of nature, there are certain natural inequalities, strength, age, and sex that allow some individuals to have more liberties than others hold. The social contract removes these inequalities, and, because all inequalities are given up before forming a Commonwealth, it makes all men equal under the law. The society Locke creates, known as capitalism, is a system of greed and unequality that can not be justified. No man has the right to appropriate more than his share. If he does this takes away from the ability of others to self persevere and we will have reverted back to a state of war that both Locke and Rousseau claim was the reason for setting up a society. The Second Treatise on Government should be renamed the Second Treatise on Maintaining, Greed, Wealth, and Power, because that is what it is. Locke's arguments favor those who have wealth. Those who have none are left to try to obtain property and wealth in a system designed to maintain the status quo of those with wealth and property. Therefore, the factory worker who labours ninety hours a week never obtains wealth and property although he has laboured long and hard. However, the wealthy son of the landowner, who has never worked a day in his life, maintains the wealth of his ancestry without the least bit of labour. Under Rousseau's system the people, who are supposed to act for the general good, could pass legislation creating greater economic equality amongst the population.
|
|
|
Favorites
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Magnolia
StumbleUpon
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
BlinkList