If a man is unjust when he injures a man and won't condemn himself, then how will this unjust person be overthrown? Won't he just be unfair again and use his absolute power to avoid being overthrown?
Vocab transgressors- a person who... infringe or go beyond the bounds of (a moral principle or other established standard of behavior) : she had transgressed an unwritten social law | [ intrans. ] they must control the impulses that lead them to transgress.
arbitrary- adjective based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system : his mealtimes were entirely arbitrary. • (of power or a ruling body) unrestrained and autocratic in the use of authority : arbitrary rule by King and bishops has been made impossible.
controversies-noun ( pl. -sies) disagreement, typically when prolonged, public, and heated.
consent- noun permission for something to happen or agreement to do something
okay sorry it took me awhile to put my DPD this was kinda hard... hahaha anyways... DPD: If men in their natural state were rational and followed the natural law which states that men are "all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health , liberty, or possessions," why would they need to get into society for protection?
it kinda seems like an IQ... but that's all i could come up with :)
1) If men mainly desire the "preservation of their property", most laws given by the gvernment would be rejected and the government would then be overthrown if it tried to persuade unwilling people to abide by them; there would be a constant removal and replacement of government. For example, Locke states: "Thirdly, they [the government] must not raise taxes on the property of the people without the consent of the people". Who on earth would give consent for the government to raise taxes and make the people pay MORE of what they have if, in the "State of Nature", man is mainly concerned with the preservation of his property? The people can simply say "no thanks", and the government can't do a thing about it. Also, if the people do agree to a law like this, or any law for that matter, they can change their mind at any time and, again, the government can't do a thing about it. Why even bother with a government in this case?
2) How can the "State of Nature" have a "natural law"(reason) to govern it, when in a natural state laws based on psychological reasoning do not exist?
why don't you just pick the one you think is the best or the easiest to write an IQ about since it's gonna be hard to write one really fast if it's a hard dpd?
umm ok i have this but im not sure, see what you guys thinK, and sorry it took so long, i was havin internet issues :S
If no man can "do hurt to one another", then how can it be their responsibility to over rule a government who is breaking their social contract? Wouldn't that be "doing hurt" to the ruler?
if men in their natural state look after their own property , how could they willingly enter a social contract in which he would have to pay taxes, which is essentially giving away his property?
If no man can "do hurt to one another", then how can it be their responsibility to over rule a government who is breaking their social contract? Wouldn't that be "doing hurt" to the ruler?
wouldn't it be pointless for men in their natural state to go into society and follow laws for the preservation of their property since the laws that have to get the people's consent like raising taxes would probably get rejected since most people won't agree to it?
Wouldn't it be pointless for men in their natural state to go into society and follow laws for the preservation of their property since the laws that have to get the people's consent like raising taxes would probably get rejected since most people won't agree to it?
who has costumes? we need a judge like wig or 2 (constitution), a fred flinstone sorta robe-thing (cave people), and any type of tie or just our normal clothes (school thing). Is that right jen?
When John Locke writes, “The great and chief end, therefore, of men’s uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property … [The supreme power] must not raise taxes on the property of the people without the consent of the people,” does he mean that the protection of the people’s property is most important result of men coming together in a political community and following the same laws from the government where it cannot raise taxes on the property without the people’s permission? If so, what is the point of men in their natural state going into society where they will most likely reject all laws to protect their property, when they can stay in the state of nature?
32 comments:
hi luisa can i do it tomorrow
tomorrow for sure please?
i wanna read in bed :P
haha ok Jen wants to do it for tomorrow to... alright but u guys try to post it earlier please tomoro so i have time :)
If a man is unjust when he injures a man and won't condemn himself, then how will this unjust person be overthrown? Won't he just be unfair again and use his absolute power to avoid being overthrown?
Vocab
transgressors- a person who...
infringe or go beyond the bounds of (a moral principle or other established standard of behavior) : she had transgressed an unwritten social law | [ intrans. ] they must control the impulses that lead them to transgress.
arbitrary-
adjective
based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system : his mealtimes were entirely arbitrary.
• (of power or a ruling body) unrestrained and autocratic in the use of authority : arbitrary rule by King and bishops has been made impossible.
controversies-noun ( pl. -sies)
disagreement, typically when prolonged, public, and heated.
consent-
noun
permission for something to happen or agreement to do something
thanks majo :)
okay sorry it took me awhile to put my DPD
this was kinda hard... hahaha
anyways...
DPD: If men in their natural state were rational and followed the natural law which states that men are "all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health , liberty, or possessions," why would they need to get into society for protection?
it kinda seems like an IQ... but that's all i could come up with :)
ok thanks jenn! now i just need Alex's...
1) If men mainly desire the "preservation of their property", most laws given by the gvernment would be rejected and the government would then be overthrown if it tried to persuade unwilling people to abide by them; there would be a constant removal and replacement of government. For example, Locke states: "Thirdly, they [the government] must not raise taxes on the property of the people without the consent of the people". Who on earth would give consent for the government to raise taxes and make the people pay MORE of what they have if, in the "State of Nature", man is mainly concerned with the preservation of his property? The people can simply say "no thanks", and the government can't do a thing about it. Also, if the people do agree to a law like this, or any law for that matter, they can change their mind at any time and, again, the government can't do a thing about it. Why even bother with a government in this case?
2) How can the "State of Nature" have a "natural law"(reason) to govern it, when in a natural state laws based on psychological reasoning do not exist?
lol. sorry. Had to rewrite it coz the internet stuffed up and I lost the DPD.
kk thanks guys, im gonna try to do the group dpd ASAP so you can all make your IQ's for tomorow. BTW alex, very deep :) haha
lucky us =P.lol. kk kul. do we need to post the IQs on the blog or just bring them 2moro???thanks btw
umm just bring them tomorow... :S im kinda stuck on the group DPD, u have any ideas?
ok natural state and ruler overthrown has to be in there somewhere.
why don't you just pick the one you think is the best or the easiest to write an IQ about since it's gonna be hard to write one really fast if it's a hard dpd?
umm ok i have this but im not sure, see what you guys thinK, and sorry it took so long, i was havin internet issues :S
If no man can "do hurt to one another", then how can it be their responsibility to over rule a government who is breaking their social contract? Wouldn't that be "doing hurt" to the ruler?
that is a good one! haha ok i get going on my iq!
ok we have 3 DPD's to choose from:
if men in their natural state look after their own property , how could they willingly enter a social contract in which he would have to pay taxes, which is essentially giving away his property?
If no man can "do hurt to one another", then how can it be their responsibility to over rule a government who is breaking their social contract? Wouldn't that be "doing hurt" to the ruler?
wouldn't it be pointless for men in their natural state to go into society and follow laws for the preservation of their property since the laws that have to get the people's consent like raising taxes would probably get rejected since most people won't agree to it?
they all good. you want us to just pick one of them nd write an IQ or all decide on one DPD???
Ok so our final group DPD, over a discussion, is:
Wouldn't it be pointless for men in their natural state to go into society and follow laws for the preservation of their property since the laws that have to get the people's consent like raising taxes would probably get rejected since most people won't agree to it?
kk kul.ill get started
hey. so how we gonna do the skit???
SCHOOL LIFE. lol jk, i dont know...
OK cave people it is =]
hahah i dont care if we do cave people as long as we have 10 minutes of skit =] lol but we can leave the planning to the project director hehe JEN.
hey I 4got bout dat. thanks jen! lol. just brainstorm and then put some ideas on the blog and we can all put the ideas 2getha into da skit
who has costumes? we need a judge like wig or 2 (constitution), a fred flinstone sorta robe-thing (cave people), and any type of tie or just our normal clothes (school thing). Is that right jen?
lol ya i agree... and JEN might need to post something pretty soon. hehe.
ok so 2 things:
1. i need you guys to post ur IQ's so i can put them all together and turn them in on tuesday.
2. group meeting after school tomoro :)
this is my IQ:
When John Locke writes, “The great and chief end, therefore, of men’s uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property … [The supreme power] must not raise taxes on the property of the people without the consent of the people,” does he mean that the protection of the people’s property is most important result of men coming together in a political community and following the same laws from the government where it cannot raise taxes on the property without the people’s permission? If so, what is the point of men in their natural state going into society where they will most likely reject all laws to protect their property, when they can stay in the state of nature?
kk thanks. ummm here are the stuff we have to bring tomorow:
Principal(jen): formal
Student(majo): normal
Cavemen(me+jen): sheets from majo
Queen(me): majo's red cape +
Peasant(jen): shawl- ???
Normal people (me+jen): ???
John Locke(ALEX):
Grey hair wig from Laura
Ruffle shirt from Luisa
Pants from Jen
Black Coat from Luisa
bubble thingy: majo???
oh and i asked yujin for the wig, but she didnt answer yet
hehe yayyy! 97.5% :)
Post a Comment