Download, andRead, Markup, and and write reflections for your Dropbox on
In our own day, within our nation and among the other nations we see many controversies which are religious in nature, and these controversies have political repercussions, and some of these boil over into acts of violence. (Think, for example about the current political campaign’s issues regarding abortion, or the presence of what many call Islamophobia in our society.)
1.To what extent should a government enforce religious conformity? This is the question Locke raises in this essay. Is it legitimate to use the force of government to make people conform: either positive force (rewards) or negative force (punishments)? Why, or why not?
2.Locke defines civil authority this way: “The commonwealth seems to me to be a society of men constituted only for the procuring, preserving, and advancing their own civil interests,” which he goes on to define as “life, liberty, health, and indolency of body; and the possession of outward things, such as money, lands, houses, furniture, and the like.” Does this leave society any role in repressing ideas?
3.Taking the argument one step further, does any private individual have the right to deprive a person of his/her civil interest because of that person’s religion?
4.And finally, does Locke’s argument extend to everyone? Or are there some classes of individuals whose religion is such that it is appropriate to discriminate against them. Is Locke correct about this? Why or why not? Make this a final sticky note before placing your marked up document in the Dropbox.
Locke's concerns weren't just academic. England had undergone generations of civil strife with religious undertones. A woodcut from Fox's Book of Martyrs, an early account of the religious persecution is presented above. Click on it to locate other similar illustrations.
John Winthrop, painted as the proper Jacobean gentleman he was. Notice the elegant lace collar. Images of puritans dressed drably in black were largely the creation of 19th century Victorians like Nathaniel Hawthorne. Click on Winthrop's image to reach the home of the John Winthrop Society.
Find out what the motto of the society, Praeservare et Transmittere, means, and write it in the margin of the Model Browse around a little and see what resources are there.
As we saw last Tuesday before Thanksgiving Thomas Hobbes begins with an observation on human equality. His view was that humans in the state of nature were all equal, and we made a point of trying to see what he meant by that term (remember the distinction between identity and equality). Winthrop’s view could hardly be more different. He begins by observing inequality and attempting to demonstrate that this inequality is a good thing. I want to spend this class period closely examining the differences between these two men.
First I’d like to have you pay some attention to Winthrop’s defense of inequality. How can he defend inequality as being good for humans? He’ll provide three distinct and different reasons. Make sure you understand each, and if you don’t, have questions ready to raise.
Second, the differences he defines leads him to a series of pronouncements about what society is for, and as you might suspect there are some differences from Hobbes’ view. Winthrop defines a community based on “love and affection,” rather than on mutual fear. Be sure to note that this community extends beyond the faithful (see lines 55 - 60).
Third, look to both general principles of how members of a society are to relate to each other (lines, 215 - 240; 285 - 295) and practical applications of those principles as he presents them in a series of “questions and answers”.
Finally it might be useful to think about how those principles might apply to a variety of different “communities”–including academic communities such as this one
Another Illustration from Foxe's Book of Martyrs. The Piedmont mentioned above isn't in the USA. It is in France. To learn more about the Waldensians, click the image.