Name: Professor: Course: Date: PART ONE Comparison of Different Ideologies According To John Locke Spencer and Rousseau Private property and wealth distribution among people of a given society have been sensitive discussion topics for centuries. Locke Rousseau and Spencer presented varying and at times overlapping ideological perspectives on the matter. Each scholar believes the manner of property acquisition property ownership as well as economic wellbeing should be matters that require adequate consultation. Although the three tend to have different ideological perspective each attempted to advocate for a scenario where there is harmony between the economy and man to promote overall sustainability (Nicholson 3). Locke Locke’s sentiments on matters of property were mainly based on a biblical perspective. According to the scholar the earth was uniquely made to satisfy the needs of all humanity. This implies that the resources in it were created for humankind in common. He further added do not necessarily have to compromise the ability of other people in reaching their respective needs. This being the case new regulations should be standardized in a manner that enables laborers in a given industrial setting are adequately paid according to the level of their services. This is essential as it would enable the people to work hard so that they may be able to raise the relevant capital necessary to allow to them to own private properties. Hen this is achieved then the situation may be regarded as being fair for all. When all this is achieved people are also likely to experience societal growth altogether. Works Cited BIBLIOGRAPHY Cohen Marshall Thomas Nagel Thomas Scanlon and George G. Brenkert. Marx Justice and History. . 1980. . Internet resource. Nicholson Peter P. The Political Philosophy of the British Idealists: Selected Studies. . Cambridge:: Cambridge University Press 1989. . Print. [...]
For your midterm assignment, you are to respond to the two following questions/prompts. Your Midterm Paper must be at least 5 pages in total (double spaced, 1 inch margins, 12 pt font) in length. It will be due on BlackBoard no later than October 29 @ 11:59 pm. You will have no discussion boards or writing assignments until after this exam. Part 1: Compare and contrast the view of private property in Locke, Rousseau, and Spencer. Specifically, refer to Locke, "Labour as the Basis of Property," Rousseau, "The Earth Belongs to Nobody," and Spencer, "The Right to the Use of the Earth." First, explain each author's position and what they are arguing for (i.e. how does private property come in to existence? Who has claim to it? How must it be used? etc.). Then, I want you to elaborate on what 2017 America would look like in terms of how we relate to property under each respective understanding of how property works -- would we relate to property/possessions differently? What, if anything, would be the same? Would this be a good or bad thing, and why. Part 2: Compare and contrast the essays by Hume and Marx on the issue of distributive justice ("The Impossibility of Equality" and "From Each According to His Abilities, To Each According to His Needs," respectively). What is each author's position on the possibilities for distributive justice? How is economic justice to be distributed and what is it about that particular method that makes this pursuit worthwhile? Finally, I want you to answer in your own words whether or not economic justice is something that a society should concern itself with -- we are heavily invested in equal rights and equal treatment under the law, but where does economic justice fit in to our political project? Elaborate your response with the benefits and/or drawbacks of concerns with notions of economic justice, and the potential implications (positive and/or negative) it might have for our society.