Part 1 – THIS LAND IS MY LAND
The philosopher John Locke believes that individuals have certain rights—to life, liberty, and property—which were given to us as human beings in the “the state of nature,” a time before government and laws were created. According to Locke, our natural rights are governed by the law of nature, known by reason, which says that we can neither give them up nor take them away from anyone else.
Part 2 – CONSENTING ADULTS
If we all have unalienable rights to life, liberty, and property, how can a government enforce tax laws passed by the representatives of a mere majority? Doesn’t that amount to taking some people’s property without their consent? Locke’s response is that we give our “tacit consent” to obey the tax laws passed by a majority when we choose to live in a society.
Episode 04
Filed Under: Watch Tagged With: Consent, John Locke, Taxes, Unalienable Rights
Discuss: What Do You Think?
The spirited classroom debate doesn't have to end when class is over. Share your thoughts with other viewers from around the world by joining one of the discussions below:
Unalienable Rights • 212 Comments
Philosopher John Locke believes that your “unalienable right” to liberty does not include the right to kill yourself. Is he right? What does your liberty entitle you to do with yourself? Where do the limits come from?
Discuss NowMajority Rules • 149 Comments
John Locke believes that government, once it is set up, should be guided by the principle of majority rule. However, he also believes that the purpose of government is to protect people’s rights, including their “unalienable” right to property. What if these two goals conflict? What if a poor majority wants to tax a rich minority?
Discuss NowPoll Challenge 04 - Yes • 107 Comments
Why then do you think that the philosopher John Locke maintains that “every man has a property in his own person,” and yet denies that people have a right to enslave themselves? Is Locke just confused?
Discuss NowPoll Challenge 04 - No • 77 Comments
But doesn’t the idea of ownership mean that I may do whatever I want with what I own, including myself? Is the philosopher Robert Nozick wrong in claiming that “the central core of the notion of a property right in X . . . is the right to determine what shall be done with X”?
Discuss Now Comments? To discuss a topic from this video, please join one of the discussions listed above or visit the community to see all discussions. If you would like to make a comment about the quality of this video, click here.
Loading ...
163 Responses to Episode 04