Locke And Rousseau And The Laws Of Nature In The 17th Century

1167 Words 5 Pages
Laws of Nature When I think about laws in place in contemporary times, in other countries and in my own, or the meaning of human rights, the definition I would give can only be that of the regurgitated connections and learnings I have made while interacting in society and the information others have passed along to me or I have searched out for myself; however, for my purposes throughout this analysis, it should be explicitly known that I intend to keep myself separated emotionally and restrict the use of any seemingly bias responses, the goal of which is to allow more clear connections between famous pieces of texts written in the past with the understood definitions of that time to definitions and common understandings in the 21st century. In the early 18th century and late 17th century there was much discussion about the roles of government and laws of society. While there is always discussion going on about government and other such matters at all times present and past, my particular focus is on the discussions mainly in the 1700’s. This century is primitive to understanding how …show more content…
Now this is not to saw that these pieces of text were perfect or had all the greatest ideas because even I had personal bias. For example, I thought Locke’s idea of always going back to the first convention, which I also felt off put that included ‘Grotius’, he states “The law of majority voting is itself something established by convention, and presupposes unanimity, on one occasion at least.” It also can get difficult to understand Locke because he likes to talk about a lot of philosophical concepts but there is no doubt he was inspirational. Just like I had a personal bias and shared it, others wanted to speak up

Related Documents