Two Treatises of Government and a Letter Concerning Toleration

by John Locke

Book Overview

Two of Locke's most mature and influential political writings and three brilliant interpretive essays combined in an outstanding volume "The new standard edition of Locke for students of political... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1420951882
• ISBN13: 9781420951882
• Release Date: January 2016
• Publisher: Digireads.com
• Length: 242 Pages
• Weight: 0.74 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.6" x 5.5" x 8.5"

Customer Reviews

Much to be thankful for

An amazing intellectual honesty and courageous spirit John Locke had. This book should be read with context of time period in mind. John Locke is more appreciative and thoughtful of the independence of man than many are today- those who are independent and free because of men like John Locke. Perhaps, some will argue that his theories were incomplete or not tolerable enough, but the man is a major contributor to the Englightenment. There is much to be thankful for. The first treatise is a response to Robert Filmer's "Patriarcha". Filmer was a monarchist who strongly believed that Scripture proved that authoritarianism was natural and patriarchy its vessel- following the line of Adam. Locke strongly reputes Filmer's reasoning. The first treatise can be summed up on page 77: "And there would be an end of all civil government, if the assignment of civil power were by divine institution to the heir, and yet by that divine institution the person of the heir could not be known. This paternal regal power being by divine right only his, it leaves no room for human prudence, or consent, to place it any where else; for if only one man hath a divine right to the obedience of mankind, nobody can claim that obedience but he that can show that right; nor can men's consciences by any other pretence be obliged to it. And thus this doctrine cuts up all government by the roots." The second treatise is Locke's argument for civil government of the people- not monarchy. He strongly argues in defense of the individual, property rights, freedom of conscience, man's equality, ending status quo, elected representation, and much more. He makes a strong case for what he believes is the purpose of government and how those governments should avoid arbitrary power. Having studied Thomas Jefferson, it is obvious that Jefferson invested much stock in Locke's ideas. He parallels Locke in many ways. "A Letter Concerning Toleration" would benefit many Christians and non-Christians. In fact, Christopher Hitchens could have saved himself some time and a book- "God is Not Great"- had he read John Locke's response that ironically was written 300 years prior to Hitchens' criticism. Due to time and space- I could go on in details about what a wonderful piece of literature I believe this to be- but I will spare the reader. There are 3 essays at the end of Locke's letters. The first, written by John Dunn, who obviously has the hots for 4 syllable words and plugging fellow historians. The second, by Ruth Grant, who seems a tad bitter and unappreciative that Locke didn't go far enough with women's liberation. I suppose he was too busy with that whole dismantling the monarchy thing. The third, by Ian Shapiro who gives a fair and enjoyable summation of Locke's views on Democracy.

This EDITION

Why review Locke himself? This is the edition to get, regardless of the fact that you may only need to read the second treatise for most classes. The print is somewhat small but not blinding, the book is sturdy and will stand up to abuse, and like another reviewer stated it is well formatted and organized. Where this book really shines is in the 3 essays provided, all from highly competent and recognized scholars. Ruth Grant's essay "Locke on Women and The Family" is by far the best, and her analysis of how we fairly and unfairly impose modern questions on historical figures is instructive far past the single case of John Locke. John Dunn's essay is a bit obtuse and convoluted but provides a fascinating look at Lockean scholarship in perspective, while Shapiro's essay is the least captivating but perhaps the most important, as it attempts to distinguish just how much (or poignantly little) Locke actually had to say about democracy and majority rule. Don't waste your time with a 2 dollar paperback edition; treat your brain to the feast presented in this fine piece of an academic edition.

DONT BE SCARED! Locke for non-scholars

I'm no genius. A pedant, perhaps, and an arrogant jerk, but not a guy with the kind of education it seems other reviewers have. I can't tell you who Locke's friends were or what his political connections were, either. I have some vague notion that Locke's and Mill's ideas influenced the philisophical basis of the American founding documents, but I'm just a soldier who sometimes likes to bite off more than he can chew--I wan't to know the stuff them smart people do, and don't see any reason I shouldn't! So if you're like me, let me encourage you to get this book. Your friends will almost certainly call you a nerd (after all, who reads 17th century political philosophy for FUN?), and it'll take a few pages to cut your teeth on the language, but after you get going, this book is a breeze. I can't tell you the philisophical doctrines nor their framework in several distinct points, but I can tell you this: the language, to one of average education, was a little hard to wrap my brain around, but what worked for me was just to set a pace and trudge through it without getting hung up on the one sentence that twisted my mind into a pretzel. After a few pages (maybe 10 or 15) I found that my brain was correcting for the nature of the wording, and for the rest of the book, I swear, I understood what was going on through the second treatise and the Letter, too. After I got going, I was all highlighters and folded corners, but it had too many profound and simple statements to save them all in my head. If you're even vaguely political, this book will make points as absolutely applicable to today's world politics as it did to those of the bygone time. It applies from everything from the crazy long haired hippie communist democrats to the crazy power-mad Neocons, but it'll make you wish with all your heart that both ruling parties of American Government would give it a quick read over the recess. Anyhow, I rate this work as 4 stars out of 5. Mostly that's because I have absolutely nothing to compare it against, and am therefore hesitant to give it 5 stars, because it's the first political philosophy I've ever read. But dammit, it seems like a pretty good one to me. Just don't let it scare you off, you don't need to be a genious to understand this. Let's even the playing field between us regular people and the academic jerks (love you guys, really, just making a point) that like to write reviews even Locke wouldn't understand :) This stuff is great, and it's great for even those who, like me, are only moderately intelligent readers.

Most Representative Thinker in Anglo-American Tradition

John Locke (1632-1704) wrote "Second Treatise of Government" in 1690, it was the main political philosophical source that our "Founding Fathers" went to in writing the "Declaration of Independence" and in forming our government. I think you should know something of Locke to understand what influenced his thinking. His father was a small landowner, attorney, Puritan and his political sympathies were with the Cromwell Parliament. Like Hobbes, Locke attended Oxford Univ. and did not think much about the curriculum or his professors. Most of his education came from reading books in the Univ. library. Renee Descartes and Sir Isaac Newton's writings greatly influenced Locke. Like Hobbes, he took a tutoring job teaching the son of the 1st Earl of Shaftesbury, and traveled Europe. His friendship with the Earl was beneficial in obtaining government appointments. During the political unrest in England, (1679-83) he fled to Holland because his liberal notions put him at odds with the government. Locke writes the "Second Treatise of Government" to justify the Revolt of 1688 and the ascension of William of Orange to the English throne. The book argues against two lines of absolutist ideas. The first is Sir Robert Filmer's "patriarchal theory of divine right of kings; secondly, Hobbes argument for the sovereign's absolute power in his book "Leviathan." Locke argues that government emanates from the people. Locke's treatise rests like other political writings on its interpretation of human nature. He sees our nature opposite the way Hobbes did, decent and not as selfish or competitive. Man is more inclined to join society through reason and not fear. Man prefers stability to change. His very important contribution to "law of nature" theory was his bias toward individualism. In state of nature, before government, men were free independent, equal enjoying inalienable rights "chief among them being life, liberty, and property." Where have you read that before? Property rights receive much attention in this treatise. Locke argues that government based on consent of man can still preserve freedom independence and equality. His political writing had immediate influence in the world and influenced our founding fathers in their struggle against tyranny. He is an excellent writer and his theories are easy to understand by the laymen. As a graduate student of political philosophy, I recommend if you have an interest in politics, philosophy, or government then you must read Locke's "Second Treatise of Government"

Correction

John Locke did not "steal" his ideas from the constitution; his writings were the basis for many of Thomas Jefferson's ideas in the Declaration and subsequently influenced the American constitution. His treatise is a defining moment in political writings and a must read for anyone who is interested in history, politics or philosophy. This is a good book that covers his key writings.