영문초록
Consent theory has provided us with a more appealing account of political obligation than any other tradition in modern political theory. Since Locke`s impassioned defense of the natural freedom of man, the doctrine of personal consent has dominated both ordinary and philosophical thinking on the subject of our political bonds. The heart of this doctrine is the claim that no man is obligated to support or comply with any political power unless he has personally consented to its authority over him. It has greatly influenced the political institutions of many modern states. But there are manifold difficulties inherent in a consent theory approach to the problem of political obligation. John Locke`s political theory is a source for proponents of both individual rights and popular sovereignty. The interpretation of Locke as a typical individualist has long been accepted. According to C. E. Vaughan, for Locke, the state is the prince of individuals, and therefore no more than a Limited Liability Company: the real sovereignty resides in the individual. For Vaughan, Locke is the prince of individualists. W. Kendall, in effect, reverses this image of Locke. He argues that, so far from safeguarding the rights of individuals, Locke sets up a government which demands their entire obedience, and cannot be removed unless conditions become so bad that the majority of the people are driven to revolt. But Kendall, Vaughan too, went too far. Where apparently contradictory views are put forward, each expresses one side of the truth, but falsifies the truth as a whole when it emphasizes its own side to the exclusion of the other. Another interpretation is that consent plays no necessary role in Locke`s theory of obligation at all. In H. Pitkin`s view, the original contract is simply an agreement to limit any subsequent government to act within the bounds of the law of nature, which requires respect for natural rights to property. Then people`s obligations to obey depend on the character of the government, that is, whether it is acting within the bounds of the contract. This view is plausible; but it is not Locke`s. Locke`s doctrine of consent is excessively vague and of limited use as an explanation of political obligation. Still, his commitment to what he called ``consent`` is unassailable. What Locke sought was a means of basing political authority on the voluntary actions of free individuals; that he might not have succeeded in no way detracts from his intentions. In contrast to Pitkin, R. Ashcraft maintains that Locke defended the natural right of every man to give his personal consent to the government as a condition of his definition of political society. In his view, Locke establishes a much closer empirical link (than has generally been assumed by interpreters of his political thought) between his notion of consent and the institutional practice of elections. Yet Locke is not an apologist for a particular form of government. He does not attempt to establish a connection between the giving of consent and the choosing of representatives. He does not use the notion of consent to make a case for representative government. (Seowon University / kbsong@seowon.ac.kr)
추천자료
[존 롤스][절차적 정의][정의관][공리주의적 정의관][정치적 정의관]존 롤스의 절차적 정의, 존 롤스의 정의관, 존 롤스의 공리주의적 정의관, 존 롤스의 정치적 정의관, 존 롤스와 경제윤리관, 존 롤스와 계약론
롤즈의 정의이론 분석 및 현대사회에서의 시사점 고찰
사회정의론 - 존 롤즈의 정의론 요약
[로크] 로크의 생애, 로크의 사상, 로크의 정치사상, 로크의 유아교육사상, 로크의 인간지성론과 통치론, 로크의 이신론, 로크의 도덕철학, 로크의 자유주의적 국가이론, 로크사상의 영향 분석
핼리팩스와 로크
The Social Obligations of Health Care Practitioners
존 로크 인간은 매우 합리적이고 이성적인 존재
윤리적 분석을 위한 틀
[인권][자본주의][정부형태][사회복지시설][프랑스혁명]인권의 역사, 인권의 중요성, 인권의 역할, 인권의 자본주의, 인권의 정부형태, 인권의 사회복지시설, 인권의 프랑스혁명, 인권 관련 시사점 분석(자본주의)
제3장 정치혁명-민주주의, 인권, 헌법의 발명
분야
15001747.pdf 
