NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Is there a cogent defense of private property? When we thoroughly examine Locke and Aristotle's views on private property, it is evident that there is indeed a cogent defense of private property. Private property plays an important role in the theory of Locke. Locke answers several questions in his discussion of property. At what point does an item become private property? How does man acquire property?
What amount of private property can a person have? How do you measure this amount? Locke also looks at how value and communities emerged from the establishment of property. For Locke, natural law, or law in the state of nature, begins and ends with the natural right of property. (Locke, 1994) Locke believed primitive man existed in a state of nature, which was one of peace, goodwill, and preservation. In this state, property was common in the sense that everyone had an equal right to draw subsistence from whatever was offered in nature. Man had a natural right to that with which he mixed his labor.
The fundamental idea behind this theory on private property was that by expending ones internal energy (owns labor power) upon something, that item became a part of oneself, or ones private property. This theory on property contained a second part, sometimes referred to as the spoilage proviso. The idea behind the spoilage proviso was that one was entitled to take out of the common only as much as one could make use of to ones advantage before it spoiled. (Locke, 1994) Whatever is taken beyond this is considered more than ones share and belonged to others. As the population increased and as property took on value, there was a need for boundaries between the private properties of different owners. For it is labor indeed that puts the difference of value on every thing (Locke, 1994). What Locke is saying here is that the more labor that is put into harvesting a corn field, the more the corn the proprietor will get out of the land, and the more value the land will have.
Locke says of the products of the earth useful to the life of man nine tenths are the effects of labor (Locke, 1994). In effect, the increase of land meant an increase in the employment of land, which built the foundations for the cities, industry, and government that emerged. Private property led to bartering, usually trading non-perishable items such as money, for perishable items such as fruit. As Locke states it, man is exceeding the bounds of his just property not lying in the largeness of his possession (Locke, 1994). The invention of money, a private property, gave man the opportunity to enlarge his possessions, status, and wealth.
Locke's theory of property emerged in the sixteenth century. We need to examine a scenario to understand how Locke's theory applies to the nineteenth century. Locke's theory of property can not incorporate each person into its meaning. The information that Locke wrote applied to the sixteenth century. This is by no means Locke's fault because he could not predict the way of life in the twentieth century. God gave the world to mankind for everyone to share.
God created the world so that everything, including everyone would be equal. We know that the world was useless without labor. What Locke failed to include in his theory was that certain people such as the disabled may not be able to use their bodies for labor. This means that they are unable to produce their own food, shelter, and other necessities to survive. The outcome of mans labor is his property. Does this mean that a disabled person can not have the necessities for survival?
God forced men to labor (to survive), thus creating the condition of life. If a person is not able to supply physical labor, does this mean he does not have the right to survive? God created the condition of life, thus causing the disabled to be unequal. Locke says, every man has a property in his own person (Locke, 1994), referring to the labor of ones body. If man does not have labor does he not have property?
Aristotle's construction of a ruling mechanism is similar in many respects to that put forward by his mentor Plato, in the Republic, but one instance where Aristotle's opinion significantly diverges from Plato's is on the issue of private property. Private property is abolished in the Republic, but in a polity, Aristotle views it as a necessity. Property must also belong to the citizens, for the citizens must have a supply of property land should belong to those who bare arms and to those who share in the constitution (The Works of Aristotle, 1998). Aristotle claims that the middle class will not be able to rule unless they are essentially given a push up, and that push is property ownership private property enables the middle class to rule. Aristotle's relationship between necessity and luxury is very interesting. He says that, while the city comes into existence for the sake of mere life, it exists for the sake of a good life (The Works of Aristotle, 1998).
The city, and therefore constitution, begins because people require certain things to live. However, that is not enough to maintain a city. A city is able to continue to provide necessity only because the city is also used to acquire luxury. One subtle way of looking at that statement and analysis is to say that luxury turns into necessity.
Private property is a luxury that is allowed to the middle class to help them achieve the ability to rule, but in fact, it is the rule of the middle class that will prevent the city from crumbling. In that sense, private property is no longer a luxury but a necessity for the stability of the just city, and the pursuit of the good life. Aristotle's arguments for the rule of the middle class and the existence of private property are very convincing. He successfully shows that a government, which best allows its citizens to live the good life must necessarily be stable. To achieve that stability, those who rule should be chosen because of their ability to maintain control when other classes challenge them, and for their reluctance to corrupt and start ruling for their own self-interest.
The middle class was the obvious choice the poor and rich could never unite to mount an effective challenge. In order for the middle class to have the potential to rule, wealth, luxury, and specifically private property must be allowed. Words Count: 1, 086. Bibliography Locke, J. Two Treatises of Government. Edited by J.
Thompson. New York: Harper Collins, 1994. The Works of Aristotle Translated into English. General editor W. D. Ross; various translators. 11 Volumes.
Oxford University Press, 1998.
Free research essays on topics related to: middle class, locke theory, sixteenth century, private property, state of nature
Research essay sample on State Of Nature Locke Theory
