1. Group 3
Written Report
John Locke
Two Treaties of Government
INTRODUCTION
A. HISTORICAL CONTEXT
Before discussing events that occurred in Locke‟s lifetime we should consider how his political
times were prefigured by the Peace of Augburg in 1555. An awareness of the peace will illustrate
its significant role in the creation of the Treaty of Westphalia which largely reshaped politics during
Locke‟s lifetime. With a background in the Peace of Augburg and Treaty of Westphalia we can
more comprehensively understand some of the political tumult in England during Locke‟s life, and
why he develop his theory the way he does. The Peace of Augburg was drafted and signed in 1555
by the Holy Roman Emperor and Political groups in the Germanic states. The agreement allowed
Germanic princes to freely choose either Lutheranism or Catholicism as state religions and legally
prohibited their subjects from practicing divergent religions. The agreement ended the “forcible
conversions” that Lutherans and Catholics were using to try and return Europe to a mono religious
culture. This peace was tenuous and boiled for decades, and it ultimately erupted into the Thirty
Years War. This conflict took place in Northern France and the Parsons Germanic states, and was
waged between the major religious groups in Europe. It was concluded by the signing of the Treaty
of Westphalia. The battle of Vienna occurred in the middle of the Age of Enlightenment in Europe.
Wherein John Locke was at his prime. The Ottoman ruled mostly on the Southeastern part of
Europe. They dominated the areas since 1299. Nations such as that of Egypt,Greece, Hungary,
Israel, Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Libya, Syria, Turkey, were all part of the Ottoman Empire by 1683. The
Ottomans were determined to conquer Europe. On the 6th of August 1682, the Ottomans declared
war on Vienna. Yet it was only after several months before they began their invasion. It was only
on the 14th of July, 1683 where the war between The Ottoman and Vienna really began. Early in
his medical studies, Locke met Lord Ashley, who was to become Earl of Shaftsbury. The two grew
close and Shaftsbury eventually convinced Locke to move to London and become his personal

2. physician. Locke assisted in his business and political matters, and after Shaftsbury was made
chancellor, Locke became his secretary of presentations. Shaftsbury's influence on Locke's
professional career and his political thoughts cannot be understated. As one of the founders of the
Whig party, which pushed for constitutional monarchism and stood in opposition to the dominant
Tories, Shaftsbury imparted an outlook on rule and government that never left Locke. As England
fell under a cloud of possible revolution, Locke became a target of the government. While historical
research has pointed to his lack of involvement in the incident, Locke was forced to leave in
England in 1683 due to a failed assassination attempt of King Charles II and his brother, or what
later came to known as the Rye House Plot. His arrival back in his homeland had come in the
aftermath of the dramatic departure of King James II, who'd fled the country, allowing the Whigs to
rise to power. Later called the Glorious Revolution of 1688, the event forever changed English
government, moving the balance of power from the throne to Parliament. It also set Locke up to be
a hero to many in his native country. A hero to the Whig party, Locke remained connected to
governmental affairs in his advanced years. He helped steer the resurrection of the Board of Trade,
which oversaw England's new territories in North America. Locke served as one of the body's key
members.
B. JOHN LOCKE‟S PERSONAL BACKGROUND
I. Birth and Death: John Locke, born on August 29, 1632, in Wrington, Somerset, England, went
to Westminster School and then Christ Church, University of Oxford. At Oxford he studied
medicine, which would play a central role in his life. He became a highly influential philosopher,
writing about such topics as political philosophy, epistemology, and education. Locke's writings
helped found modern Western philosophy. Philosopher, Influential philosopher and physician,
whose writings had a significant impact Western philosophy, John Locke was born August 29,
1632, in Wrington, a village in the English county of Somerset. His father was a country lawyer and
military man who had served as a captain during the English civil war. Both his parents were
Puritans and as such, Locke was raised that way. Because of his father's connections and
allegiance to the English government, Locke received an outstanding education. Long afflicted with
delicate health, Locke passed away on October 28, 1704 in Essex, where he'd resided over the
last decade of his life.Years after his death we are still gauging his impact on Western thought. His
theories concerning the separation of Church and State, religious freedom, and liberty, not only

3. influenced European thinkers such as the French Enlightenment writer, Voltaire, but shaped the
thinking of America's founders, from Alexander Hamilton to Thomas Jefferson.
II. Locke’s mentors Boyle, Newton and Discartes: John Wilkins had left Oxford with the
Restoration of Charles II. The new leader of the Oxford scientific group was Robert Boyle. He was
also Locke's scientific mentor. Boyle (with the help of his astonishing assistant Robert Hooke) built
an air pump which led to the formulation of Boyle's law and devised a barometer as a weather
indicator. Boyle was most influential as a theorist. He was a mechanical philosopher who treated
the world as reducible to matter in motion. Locke read Boyle before he read Descartes. When he
did read Descartes, he saw the great French philosopher as providing a viable alternative to the
sterile Aristotelianism he had been taught at Oxford. But his involvement with the Oxford scientists
gave him a perspective which made him critical of the rationalist elements in Descartes'
philosophy. Locke knew all of these men and their work. Locke, Boyle and Newton were all
founding members of the English Royal Society. It is from Boyle that Locke learned about atomism
(or the corpuscular hypothesis) and it is from Boyle's book The Origin of Forms and Qualities that
Locke took the language of primary and secondary qualities. Sydenham was one of the most
famous English physicians of the 17th century and Locke did medical research with him. Locke
read Newton's Principia Mathematica Philsophiae Naturalis in exile in Holland, and consulted
Huyygens as to the soundness of its mathematics. Locke and Newton became friends after Locke's
return from Holland in 1688. Locke's own active invovlement with the scientific movement was
largely through his informal studies of medecine. Dr. David Thomas was his friend and
collaborator. Locke and Thomashad a labratory in Oxford which was very likely, in effect, a
pharmacy. In 1666 Locke had a fateful meeting with Lord Ashley as a result of his friendship with
Thomas. Ashley, one of the richest men in England, came to Oxford. He proposed to drink some
medicinal waters there. He had asked Dr. Thomas to provide them. Thomas had to be out of town
and asked Locke to see that the water was delivered. As a result Locke met Ashley and they liked
one another. In the following year Ashley asked Locke to move to Exeter House in London to
become his personal physician. This was to start a whole new and astonishing chapter in Locke's
life.

4. III. Locke’s writings:
A Letter Concerning Toleration originally published in 1689. Its initial publication was in Latin,
though it was immediately translated into other languages. Locke's work appeared amidst a fear
that Catholicism might be taking over England, and responds to the problem of religion and
government by proposing religious toleration as the answer. This "letter" is addressed to an
anonymous "Honored Sir": this was actually Locke's close friend Philipp van Limborch, who
published it without Locke's knowledge
Two Treatises of Government The First Treatise attacks patriarchalism in the form of sentence-
by-sentence refutation of Robert Filmer's Patriarcha, while the Second Treatise outlines Locke's
ideas for a more civilized society based on natural rights and contract theory.
An Essay Concerning Human Understanding concerns the foundation of human knowledge and
understanding. He describes the mind at birth as a blank slate (tabula rasa, although he did not
use those actual words) filled later throughexperience. The essay was one of the principal sources
of empiricism in modern philosophy, and influenced many enlightenment philosophers, such
as David Hume and George Berkeley.
Some Thoughts Concerning Education is a 1693 treatise on the education of gentlemen written
by the English philosopher John Locke. For over a century, it was the most important philosophical
work on education in England. It was translated into almost all of the major written European
languages during the eighteenth century, and nearly every European writer on education after
Locke, including Jean-Jacques Rousseau, acknowledged its influence.
MAJOR THEMES
A. THE CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED:
The Second Treatise of Government places sovereignty into the hands of the people. Locke‟s
fundamental argument is that people are equal and invested with natural rights in a state of nature
in which they live free from outside rule. In the state of nature, natural law governs behavior, and
each person has license to execute that law against someone who wrongs them by infringing on
their rights. People take what they need on Earth, but hoard just enough to cover their needs.
Eventually, people begin to trade their excess good with each other, until they develop a common

5. currency for barter, or money. Money eliminates limits on the amount of property they can obtain
(unlike food, money does not spoil), and they begin to gather estates around themselves and their
families. People then exchange some of their natural rights to enter into society with other people,
and be protected by common laws and a common executive power to enforce the laws. People
need executive power to protect their property and defend their liberty. The civil state is beholden
to the people, and has a power over the people only in so far as it exists to protect and preserve
their welfare. Locke describes a state with a separate judicial, legislative and executive branch –
the legislative branch being the most important of the three, since it determines the laws that
govern civil society. People have the right to dissolve their government, if that government ceases
to work solely in their best interest. The government has no sovereignty of its own – it exists to
serve the people. To sum up, Locke‟s model consists of a civil state, built upon the natural rights
common to a people who need and welcome an executive power to protect their property and
liberties; the government exists for people‟s benefit and can be replaced or overthrown it ceases to
function toward that primary end.
B. THE PROTECTION OF THE PROPERTY
Locke uses the word property in both broad and narrow senses. In a broad sense, it covers a wide
range of human interests and aspirations; more narrowly, it refers to material goods. He argues
that property is a natural right and it is derived from labour. In Chapter V of his Second Treatise,
Locke argues that the individual ownership of goods and property is justified by the labour exerted
to produce those goods or utilise property to produce goods beneficial to human society. Locke
stated his belief, in his Second Treatise, that nature on its own provides little of value to society; he
provides the implication that the labour expended in the creation of goods gives them their value.
This is used as supporting evidence for the interpretation of Locke's labour theory of property as
a labour theory of value, in his implication that goods produced by nature are of little value, unless
combined with labour in their production and that labour is what gives goods their value. Locke
believed that ownership of property is created by the application of labour. In addition, he believed
property precedes government and government cannot "dispose of the estates of the subjects
arbitrarily." Karl Marx later critiqued Locke's theory of property in his own social theory. Labour
creates property, but it also does contain limits to its accumulation: man‟s capacity to produce and
man‟s capacity to consume. According to Locke, unused property is waste and an offence against
nature. However, with the introduction of “durable” goods, men could exchange their excessive

6. perishable goods for goods that would last longer and thus not offend the natural law. The
introduction of money marks the culmination of this process. Money makes possible the unlimited
accumulation of property without causing waste through spoilage. He also includes gold or silver as
money because they may be “hoarded up without injury to anyone, since they do not spoil or decay
in the hands of the possessor. The introduction of money eliminates the limits of accumulation.
Locke stresses that inequality has come about by tacit agreement on the use of money, not by the
social contract establishing civil society or the law of land regulating property. Locke is aware of a
problem posed by unlimited accumulation but does not consider it his task. He just implies that
government would function to moderate the conflict between the unlimited accumulation of property
and a more nearly equal distribution of wealth and does not say which principles that government
should apply to solve this problem. However, not all elements of his thought form a consistent
whole. For example, labour theory of value of the Two Treatises of Government stands side by
side with the demand-and-supply theory developed in a letter he wrote titled Some Considerations
on the Consequences of the Lowering of Interest and the Raising of the Value of Money. Moreover,
Locke anchors property in labour but in the end upholds the unlimited accumulation of wealth.
C. ON ABSOLUTE MONARCHIES
For Locke, absolute monarchy can never be a valid system of government because it violates his
principles of a social contract. People join together under a commonwealth out of the state of
nature primarily to ensure equal protection for all. The problem with the state of nature for Locke is
that there is no guarantee of equal protection for property or other goods, but a contractarian
society ensures that all people will have equal access to principles of law and be equally protected.
However, when an absolute monarchy is in place, then people do not have an equal share either in
the way their government is run or in justice. All power flows to the monarchy instead of from the
people, and the needs and desires of the monarchy trump the desires of the people over which the
monarchy rules. The illegitimacy of an absolute monarchy is a crucial point in Locke's larger
political philosophy. For Locke, it is of the utmost importance that people have a voice within their
government. This idea flows at least partially from his conception of the state of nature. Locke
believes that life in the state of nature is basically good and completely free, and that the incentive
people have for joining into a social contract is that there are inconvenience within the state of
nature. These include issues of property protection, punishment for those who violate social norms,

7. and ways of enforcing agreements. In this conception of the natural human condition, it is
unnecessary for people to be completely dominated in order to ensure that they can live together
peacefully. People will not agree to give up the absolute freedom they have in the state of nature if
they do not believe that they will obtain some benefit for doing so. In a Lockean government, the
compensation that people receive for giving up absolute freedom is that their rights will be
protected and that they will have a role in determining who will govern over them and how. The
absolute monarchy is in complete opposition to this idea, and the existence of an absolute
monarchy, or even the risk that one could come into existence, would eliminate any incentive
people would have to join together in a social contract.
D. STATE OF NATURE
Locke‟s account of political society is based on a hypothetical consideration of the human condition
before the beginning of communal life. In this “state of nature,” humans are entirely free. But this
freedom is not a state of complete.
From what I understand, the state of nature is a state of anarchy, of no order. What John Locke
believed about the state of nature was that men would act in a positive way, they can reach order
without being absolutely controlled by one person. For Locke, the state of nature is where humans
exist without an established government or social contract. People act according to "laws of nature"
which include moral equality and natural freedom (their natural rights). Society can exist in the
sense that people can work together to protect themselves and each other from those who do not
obey the laws of nature, but Locke believes people would eventually enter into a social contract
and form a government to better protect their rights and promote a more organized society. The
state of nature is basically a thought experiment, rather than an actual period in history he is
specifically referring to. Although he does mention the native tribes of North America as possibly
resembling what he imagines the state of nature to be. Thomas Hobbes first coined the term "state
of nature", by which he meant the environment where everyone acted on their desires without any
legal or moral restraint. This would obviously lead to chaos as everybody would be stealing,
pillaging and killing to satisfy their wants. Locke's vision was slightly different in that he advocated
belief in a "Law of Nature", which provided natural moral principles that people were naturally
inclined towards. These stemmed from his belief in God and His creation of Man and all things on
Earth. The basic laws are as follows: 1. Man is God's property, therefore one has the right to

8. defend oneself from harm; 2. Therefore one also has the duty to protect others from harm; 3.
Therefore one is also obligated to punish those who cause harm. From these, Locke derived
property rights where if you have added your labour to improve a piece of land (which originally has
no owner), you can claim ownership over it. In a state of nature where there is no rule of law, these
rights are not defendable. So Locke proposed a removal from the state of nature in the form of a
representative democracy that would be charged with defending these rights.
E. EQUALITY
Locke stresses that inequality has come about by tacit agreement on the use of money, not by the
social contract establishing civil society or the law of land regulating property. Locke is aware of a
problem posed by unlimited accumulation but does not consider it his task. He just implies that
government would function to moderate the conflict between the unlimited accumulation of property
and a more nearly equal distribution of wealth and does not say which principles that government
should apply to solve this problem .
F. THE PURPOSE OF GOVERNMENT AND LIMITATIONS ON POWER
Locke proposed a radical conception of political philosophy deduced from the principle of self-
ownership and the corollary right to own property, which in turn is based on his famous claim that a
man earns ownership over a resource when he mixes his labour with it. Government, he argued,
should be limited to securing the life and property of its citizens, and is only necessary because in
an ideal, anarchic state of nature, various problems arise that would make life more insecure than
under the protection of a minimal state. Locke is also renown for his writings on toleration in which
he espoused the right to freedom of conscience and religion (except when religion was deemed
intolerant!), and for his cogent criticism of hereditary monarchy and patriarchalism. After his death,
his mature political philosophy leant support to the British Whig party and its principles, to the Age
of Enlightenment, and to the development of the separation of the State and Church in the
American Constitution as well as to the rise of human rights theories in the Twentieth Century.
However, a closer study of any philosopher reveals aspects and depths that introductory
caricatures (including this one) cannot portray, and while such articles seemingly present a
completed sketch of all that can ever be known of a great thinker, it must always be remembered
that a great thinker is rarely captured in a few pages or paragraphs by a lesser one, or one that
approaches him with particular philosophical interest or bias: the reader, once contented with the
glosses provided here, should always return to and scrutinise Locke in the original – just as an

9. academic exposition of Beethoven‟s Eroica symphony will always be a sallow reflection of the
actual music. This article summarises the general drift of Locke‟s political thinking, leaving the
other IEP article on Locke to examine his general philosophy and his theory of knowledge. The
article touches on his biography as it relates to the development of his political thought, and it also
provides an analysis of some of the issues that his philosophy raises – especially with regards to
the Two Treatises of Government. Locke is rightly famous for his Treatises, yet during his life he
repudiated his authorship, although he subtly recommended them as essential reading in letters
and thoughts on reading for gentlemen. The Treatises swiftly became a classic in political
philosophy, and its popularity has remained undiminished since his time: the „John Locke academic
industry‟ is vibrant and broad with an academic journal (John Locke Studies) and books regularly
coming out dealing with his philosophy. There is a scholarly debate on when the Two
Treatises were written. They were first published in 1698, but when they were penned is of critical
importance; originally the Two Treatises were deemed an apology – a defence – for the Glorious
Revolution, but Peter Laslett claims its origins back to 1679, while Richard Ashcroft disagrees and
places it in 1680-82, allowing Locke to make amendments to the manuscript to give the impression
it acts as an apology for rather than a prescription of revolt; for readers interested in knowing more,
I refer them to Laslett‟s 1988 Cambridge Edition of the Two Treatises.In opening the Two
Treatises, diligence and perseverance pay off for the reader – and on a pedagogical note, I would
recommend (following Laslett) beginning with the Second before the First Treatise. The reader
ought to work through each chapter carefully, noting the main point or points in each section to
follow Locke‟s relatively convoluted sentences in pursuit of the main clause like Sherlock Holmes
on a case, and revising what notes have been reaped before pressing on. Locke‟s system is
brilliant, and so we must read him, for hidden in the well-crafted arguments, we also find gems of
thoughts and insights.

10. LOCKE’S SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY
Locke's political theory was founded on social contract theory. Unlike Thomas Hobbes, Locke
believed that human nature is characterised by reason and tolerance. Like Hobbes, Locke believed
that human nature allowed men to be selfish. This is apparent with the introduction of currency. In
a natural state all people were equal and independent, and everyone had a natural right to defend
his “Life, health, Liberty, or Possessions". Most scholars trace the phrase "life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness," in the American Declaration of Independence, to Locke's theory of rights,
though other origins have been suggested. Like Hobbes, Locke assumed that the sole right to
defend in the state of nature was not enough, so people established a civil society to resolve
conflicts in a civil way with help from government in a state of society. However, Locke never refers
to Hobbes by name and may instead have been responding to other writers of the day. Locke also
advocated governmental separation of powers and believed that revolution is not only a right but
an obligation in some circumstances. These ideas would come to have profound influence on
the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of the United States. In some versions of
social contract theory, there are no rights in the state of nature, only freedoms, and it is the contract
that creates rights and obligations. In other versions the opposite occurs: the contract imposes
restrictions upon individuals that curtail their natural rights. Locke‟s definition of political power has
an immediate moral dimension. It is a “right” of making laws and enforcing them for “the public
good.” Power for Locke never simply means “capacity” but always “morally sanctioned capacity.”
Morality pervades the whole arrangement of society, and it is this fact, tautologically, that makes
society legitimate.