27). While man is not given the Earth as private property, he is given what he’s labored for as private property. This introduces us to the idea that every man has property in his "own person" which "nobody has any right to but himself." (Locke Sec. 27). As a result of man's body being his own property, man's labor and "the work of his hands" is, therefore, his own as well. To Locke, the claim that our body is ours seems reasonable. Nobody owns me but me. Ironic this was written in a time when the living bodies of men and women where owned by others specifically as property. However this claim that my own self is my property is sort of strange to me. Do we really think of our body as property? Or, does Locke really mean that, God too gives us our lives and bodies and no other person has the right to control or own it. In a way, it seems to contribute to my thought that for Locke, property is so prominent that even our right to life is important because our lives belong to ourselves as …show more content…
First, makes the agreement that property is a product of man's existence in nature and that God has given man what he’s labored for as private property, not the Earth. Second, property is so prominent that even our right to life is important because our lives belong to ourselves as property. Third, that’s man’s purpose is to preserve himself and the rest of mankind so we must no waste the resources given to us. We can have land but not to much. By applying this we essentially protect the common citizen from the oppression that follows when the land is held only by a few. Fourth, we see Locke is fond of repeating himself, making similar arguments all based in based in natural logic. All throughout history and even on how we govern ourselves today we see his impact on the American political mind and his emphasis on property