The idea that humans are in control and have power over their lives is one of the biggest misconceptions in today’s society. John Locke deals with the falsity of this belief in The Second Treatise of Government. He does so by relating human existence to two states: the state of nature and the state of war. Locke shows that, in relation to human nature, humans do not hold power over their lives and, therefore, cannot pass it to another, except in a state of war.
To better understand why humans cannot transfer power of their lives, understanding Locke’s definitions of the state of nature and the state of war are important, especially how they connect. The state of nature is the rules by which humans were governed before society formed, and they can also be called natural laws. It is further described as “a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the laws of nature” (2). Simply put, human rights according to nature are the right to life, liberty, and property. The state is also one of equality, no man having more authority than another. The state of war occurs when man acts against these rights, thereby declaring war on humanity. Locke continues the description by explaining that anyone who seeks to harm another “exposed his [own] life to the other’s power to be taken away from him” (8). By seeking to destroy the natural rights of others, one loses those rights himself. These two conditions play a role in whether man has control over his life.
Locke says that, “Nobody can give more power than he has himself; and he that cannot take away his own life, cannot give another power over it” (11). What Locke means by power is that no one has the authority outside the natural law to decide if another should live or die. Mankind is created equal. If all are equal, one person receiving power over another’s life means they are no longer equal with the rest. This power was not given at the time of humans’ creation. If mankind were created with this power, they could therefore take control of others, thereby creating inequality among the species outside of the parameters of government. That which we have no power over to begin with we cannot give to another. Consider someone needs to pay his friend back, but he does not have the money. He cannot give what he does not have, and the same applies to our lives. We can bend to others’ desires and wills, but it does not mean they have absolute control over us. Also, if others had control over us, that would defy self-preservation, which is another part of human nature. If our lives were in someone else’s hands, we could not be completely certain if it was safe or not. Locke also writes that, “For a man cannot by compact, or his own consent, enslave himself to anyone, nor put himself under the absolute, arbitrary power of another to take away his life when he pleases” (11). When slaves are taken outside of wartime, the master has no right to enslave them. Conversely, if a man is captured during wartime and made a slave or has committed a crime, the act against the other party warrants that he forfeits any rights to his life because he tried to remove someone else’s rights. However, God is above all, making Him the only person who is truly in control. He is not bound by the same laws of nature since He is supreme. He is the only one who can decide the fate of our lives. Human nature dictates that one man cannot gain power over another’s life unless as a result of war.
Locke, when discussing the abilities of humans, is referring to being morally above another, not physically. He does not mean the physical, since a government can rule over us. Just because politicians have more physical power does not mean they have a higher moral power. Asking others to disregard the laws of nature would be an example of this. After all, the only reason some have higher positions is because others allow them that place, but this does not mean they no longer have the same moral obligations. The situation is like when a citizen becomes a police officer. While he gains higher authority in upholding the law, his position does not give him the right to violate it himself. Government officials have the authority to uphold the law, especially where it pertains to the law of nature, but do not have the authority to transgress it (Locke 7). The standard never changes no matter how much power one attains because otherwise we would not be equal where it truly counts. While humans have the ability to gain higher physical power, gaining higher moral power goes against nature.
John Locke deals with the question of whether or not humans have power over their lives in connection with the states of nature and war. Since mankind does not possess this power, they cannot give it to someone else because one cannot give what he does not have. The only way such power is attainable is through the act of war, which goes against nature’s laws, and, as a result, man’s life belongs to another. God, on the other hand, is above all and is not bound by these constraints. While humans have the ability to surpass others in authority positions, it does not equate to having moral superiority. The moral laws hold true for all people, no matter who they are.
Comments
Post a Comment