Locke's Waste Restriction and His Strong Voluntarism
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Locke Studies 6:127-141 (2006)
This paper argues that there is a conflict between two principles informing Locke’s political philosophy, namely his waste restriction and his strong voluntarism. Locke’s waste restriction is proposed as a necessary, enforceable restriction upon rightful private property holdings and it yields arguments to preserve and redistribute natural resources. Locke’s strong voluntarism is proposed as the liberal ideal of political obligations. It expresses Locke’s view that each individual has a natural political power, which can only be transferred to a political body through the individual’s voluntary, actual consent. On this view, the legitimacy of a political power is dependent upon its subjects’ actual consent to its authority. After briefly outlining how these two ideas inform Locke’s conception, I argue that we cannot maintain both at the same time. Therefore, contemporary Lockeans must either derive restrictions upon private property concerned with preserving natural resources from other aspects of Locke’s theory or they must accept weak voluntarism as the ideal of political obligations. I argue that both alternatives pose significant problems for the Lockean project.
|Keywords||Locke waste restriction natural executive right strong voluntarism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Helga Varden (2006). Locke's Waste Restriction and His Strong Voluntarism. Locke Studies 6:127-141.
Gordon Hull (2009). Clearing the Rubbish: Locke, the Waste Proviso, and the Moral Justification of Intellectual Property. Public Affairs Quarterly 23 (1):67-93.
Keith Frankish (2007). Deciding to Believe Again. Mind 116 (463):523 - 547.
Mark D. Mathewson (2006). John Locke and the Problems of Moral Knowledge. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 87 (4):509–526.
J. W. Tate (2013). Dividing Locke From God: The Limits of Theology in Locke's Political Philosophy. Philosophy and Social Criticism 39 (2):133-164.
Struan Jacobs & Allan McNeish (1997). Locke, McCann, and Voluntarism. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 78 (4):349–362.
John Dunn (1969). The Political Thought of John Locke: An Historical Account of the Argument of the 'Two Treatises of Government'. London, Cambridge U.P..
Paul J. Weithman (1993). Natural Law, Property, and Redistribution. Journal of Religious Ethics 21 (1):165 - 180.
I. C. Tipton (ed.) (1977). Locke on Human Understanding: Selected Essays. Oxford University Press.
Danny Frederick (2013). Doxastic Voluntarism: A Sceptical Defence. International Journal for the Study of Skepticism 3 (1):24-44.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2011-09-07
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?