John Locke vs. Baron de Montesquieu: Ideas on Government. Locke and de Montesquieu possessed remarkable differing views on government and what exact role government should take. For Locke, government needed to possess a clear and strong moral role, so that each citizen could give up his or her power in the name of bestowing that power to one single designated body. Essentially these community members give up some of their innate rights in the name of one government which is better versed at securing and protecting those rights than one single man alone. Government is a creation of the people which is developed for the greater good of the community: this means that because government is not this organic entity, it can be eradicated and replaced if it's not fulfilling its function. In that sense, many historians view Locke as making an important contribution to political thought by essentially defending the rights of all citizens to engage in a revolution (Tuckness, 2005). According to Locke, one could argue, the citizens have a responsibility...
"He used this account to explain how governments might be preserved from corruption. He saw despotism, in particular, as a standing danger for any government not already despotic, and argued that it could best be prevented by a system in which different bodies exercised legislative, executive, and judicial power, and in which all those bodies were bound by the rule of law" (Bok, 2010). In this fashion Baron de Montesquieu and Locke did engage in similar ideas of government as they both had a great deal of faith in the importance of government as founded on the division of power.
Such differences may lead us to question whether there are any universal moral principles or whether morality is merely a matter of "cultural taste" (Velasquez, Andre, Shanks and Meyer: 1). If there is no transcendent ethical or moral standard, then cultural relativists argue that culture becomes the ethical norm for determining whether an action is right or wrong. This ethical system is known as cultural relativism. Cultural relativism is the
Origins and Characteristics of the Law and Legal Systems in the U.S. The Origins and Characteristics of the Law and Legal Systems in the United States The origins and characteristics of the law and legal systems of the United States It is a commonplace observation to state that the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution of the U.S. are the origin of and provide the characteristics of the legal systems of the U.S. But
Rather, corruption continued and the widespread execution of revolutionaries by Maximilien Robespierre and Louis de Saint-Just of the Committee of Safety was largely justified with the radicalized views of Enlightenment philosopher Rousseau with regard to the revolution (Church; Lefebvre; Rude). Robespierre's distorted perception of Rousseau's views lead to an adamant and unwaivering desire to drive the revolution forward at any cost, including that of substantial human life. Robespierre was
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now