Philosophy Final Exam
4. (a) How does Locke describe the state of nature?
Locke describes the state of nature as a logical abstraction developed by man himself. He does not entirely accept it as the outcome of historical developments. He describes nature from two perspectives. The first view sees nature as a free environment where everyone has the liberty to do what pleases them as long as their actions do not have an adverse impact on others. Nature makes every man equal. No man has power over another and everyone is free. Every man has some power which lets him act with the aim of making amendments or preventing the occurrence of a catastrophic event. This perspective paints nature as a peaceful state filled with goodwill, willfulness to help and the spirit of preservation.
The second perspective paints nature as changing into a state of war characterized by hatred, ill intentions and destruction of each other.
(b) What motivates us, within the state of nature, to form a political society?
Several factors motivate man to form a political society. Nature is an ambiguous phenomenon bound to change as a consequence over time. Man is an unruly and unjust creature. The likelihood of nature turning into a state of war coupled with the presence of offenders amongst the society poses a threat to the initial state of calmness as it raises the prospects of people invading on the belongings of others and possessions which brings about a feeling of vulnerability, insecurity, and fear. Consequently, the need to have a stable structure to monitor and regulate man’s conduct and relationship with others arises. Man thus surrenders his rights and independence to a higher authority which he still holds the right to change as he wishes. Man would still be obliged to form a political society even in the absence of conflict so as to eliminate the inconvenience of having every individual make their decisions which ultimately have an impact on the entire society.
(c) What is the central task of government, according to Locke?
The central task of the government according to Locke is to maintain a state of security, calm and regulate the conduct of the society. The government is expected to act as an assurance to the every member of the society that their life and property are safe hence eliminate the fear that comes in times when these conditions are not met. It is the responsibility of the government to check and to control the contentious appetites of each and every member of the society as most of them do not adhere to the rules of justice and equity.
(d) By what principles does Locke believe that a legislative body would be limited? Explain.
Locke believes that a legislative body would be limited as it would not be granted absolute powers because man himself does not naturally have absolute power over his life or that of others or their property. He can thus not give absolute power to the legislative body. Additionally, it would be against the very reason that leads to the establishment of the legislature: to safeguard life, freedom and property of the members of the society. The presence of a legislative body with absolute powers would compromise the state of freedom offered that nature presents allowing them to at least protect their property.
5. (a) Delineate Locke’s labor theory of property.
Locke’s labor theory of property initially stated that an individual could own as much property or wealth as he had worked for which sets limitations to the extent of what one individual could own. It was however amended after the money factor was introduced. In case of land exhaustion, individuals without it would be obliged to sell labor to the land owners for them to earn their wages. Consequently, their labor becomes the property of the landowners hence disapproving the initial statement whereby a limitation to the extent of what one could own was set by the amount of effort they had given.
(b) How might we interpret Locke as overcoming the proviso that he stipulates in §27? Explain.
The proviso stipulated by Locke in §27 states that every man has a right to own property to the extent of the labor they have put in despite the fact that the earth and other creatures are common to everybody. Locke, however, overcomes this proviso by introducing the aspect of money which does not go bad over time hence eliminates the chance of going to waste.
(c) How is the provision in §31 overcome? Explain.
The proviso in §31insinuates that it is possible for man to amass as much wealth as he may, since it is just a matter of gathering what has been provided by God. It is overcome by the law of nature that also bounds property. God has given us property to enjoy it to such an extent that it does not spoil and whatever is beyond this does not belong to him but to his fellow human beings. The scales of this freedom are set by reason.
(d) Does Locke’s argument for property have any particular strengths or weaknesses? Explain.
One weakness exhibited by his argument on property is his placement of a limit to the extent of property an individual can possess. He argues that a man may accumulate as much property as he may as long as he puts it all into good use and ensures it does not spoil. This statement contradicts with Locke’s argument in support of private property. However, he counters this contradiction with the introduction of money which he says cannot go bad.
Locke’s argument on property is based on man’s absolute natural rights given to him by God. One would need to prove the existence of God first to justify this argument. God’s existence is based on faith hence not able to be proven. His argument thus lacks practical credibility. Possession of private property by a few people within the community, while the majority does not possess any, creates an unequal capitalist society. Locke endorses the acquisition of property by individuals despite claiming that it was given to man by God to be used as a common utility.
6. (a) In the Gorgias, how does Socrates characterize the proper aims of politics? Explain.
The art of persuasion was seen as a crucial part for one to succeed in politics in Athens. Socrates presents himself as one of the few Athenians who partake in actual politics. He claims that the application of philosophy, which lacks in rhetoric, in politics is mandatory in upholding high moral standards in the field. He says that the use of rhetoric is driven by selfish motives aimed at winning over the electorate and benefiting the politicians. He portrays politics as a shameful game run by greed, selfishness, and dishonesty. He says that the use of rhetoric only succeeds to flatter the concerned individuals and is not of any value whatsoever. Politics is said to take advantage of the ignorant as they are easy to convince through persuasion. According to him, there is an insufficiency of credible individuals in politics.
(b) Do you think that Socrates’ account of the political is similar to or distinct from that of Locke? Explain.
Socrates’ account of politics is similar to that of Locke. Socrates believed that governments ought to encourage a morally upright life and act as a show of common benefit of all citizens. Locke is the political father of classic liberalism. He advocated for democratic governments whereby the citizens were actively involved. He wanted a government that was in a contractual agreement with it citizens. He believed that every individual has a right to their views.
7. Write an essay on one of the following questions:
I. (a) How does Hume characterize the perceptions of the mind? Explain.
Hume holds that beliefs are influenced by experience. He bases his argument on perceptions. He classifies perceptions into two: ideas and impressions. He defines ideas as indistinct images used to think and to reason and impressions as emotions, passions, and desires. He further subdivides impressions into two: impressions of sensation and secondary impressions. The five common senses are categorized as impressions of sensation whereas impressions of refection comprise of desires, regrets, passions and emotions.
He says impressions can either be simple or complex. A combination of several simple impressions makes a complex impression. Simple impressions cannot be broken any further into smaller components. He also ranks impressions regarding their force and vivacity. He says ideas are less forceful and vivacious than impressions. At times, during a high fever or a dream, for instance, ideas may be vivacious and forceful to a point of almost getting to the level of impressions. The power of thought is not restricted by reality or nature and imagination is restricted within very narrow constrictions. It is thus possible to combine ideas in creative and weird ways. Ultimately, the elements imagined are sourced from impressions. Senses and experiences determine the kinds of imaginations we have since ideas and perceptions are products of our impressions.
(b) How does Hume distinguish relations of ideas from matters of fact?
Hume distinguishes relations of ideas from matters of fact by defining relations of ideas as statements which stand true due to the information contained therein. They are beliefs based on associations constructed in the mind and have no outward referent. It is not possible to contradict them. For instance, the statement ‘all bachelors are unmarried’ is a relation of an idea. On the other hand, matters of fact are non-analytic statements, also known as synthetic statements. They report on the condition of existing things and are always dependent. They can be contradicted. For instance, the statement ‘strong winds uproot trees’ is a matter of fact.
(c) What is Hume’s skeptical argument regarding induction?
Hume is skeptical about induction for two reasons: the descriptive problem and the normative problem. The descriptive problem dwells on how humans develop opinions about unobserved matters of fact. The normative problem dwells on whether beliefs formed from opinions are justified.
(d) Does Hume have a solution to his skepticism? Explain.
Hume provides two solutions to his skepticism. Experience influences our opinions on unobserved matters. His solution to this skepticism is that all beliefs about unobserved matters of fact are derived from experience by induction. It is important that one asks themselves whether all the beliefs that they hold about the future and other things they haven’t encountered are derived this way from experience or whether there is an instance which might contradict it.
On the normative problem, Hume uses the inference of theory from data through induction to show that we accept that there is an apparent connection between data and theory. He uses this apparent connection that he calls uniformity of nature to emphasize the claim that the future will be like the past. It acts as evidence that regularities that in one’s experience are the same that remain in nature. Thus, the deduction of conclusions from data via the uniformity of nature into theory are legitimate and all one needs to ask self is whether one has a reason to believe the uniformity of nature.
References
Locke, J. 1689–90. Second Treatise of Government. CB Macpherson (ed.) 1980.
Hume, D. (1955). An inquiry concerning human understanding (Vol. 49). C. W. Hendel (Ed.). Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
