Write 6-8 pages double spaced about question number 5

The informations should be gotten form the books (I have both of the E-books)The answer should be answered clearly and in full details. I will be graded in how clearly I am. Also, I want the pages number you get the informations from in this website by itself so I can check it.Answer Question Number 5 in the attached.
essay_questions.pdf

Unformatted Attachment Preview

HISTORY OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY II
Political Science 426/ Philosophy 427
Spring, 2018
First Paper Topics
Write an essay answering one of the following questions or talk with me about a topic of your own. The
paper should be 6-8 pages long, typed and double-spaced, and is due on or before 5:00 P.M., Wednesday,
February 21st. The paper is worth 100 possible points and will be evaluated on the basis of your ability to
address the specifics of the question and to interpret textual passages that help support your argument.
Lacking a good excuse, late papers will be penalized 10 points-per-day.
1. For Hobbes, what features of our “natural” condition mean that the exercise of our natural rights,
especially the right of private judgment, will create such a fearful condition as the state of nature? Why
does he think that it is rational to abandon our natural right and to create an absolute sovereign even if
that undermines our immediate self-interest? Where, if at all, does he go wrong in his approach to
political obligation? Explain.
2. Why do both Hobbes and Locke appeal to a “state of nature”? What do those appeals share in terms of
moral and epistemological commitments? How do their accounts of the “state of nature” nonetheless
differ with regard to natural rights, natural law, and the character of life without government? Which of
the two is more plausible? Explain.
3. Locke – para. 50: “Men have agreed to disproportionate and unequal possession of the earth.”
Locke – para. 131: “No rational creature can be supposed to change his condition for the worse.”
Is there an inconsistency here? How do Locke and others like Smith try to square the existence of private
property and economic inequality with commitments to moral equality and equal legal and political
rights. How successful are they? How successful could anyone be with that argument? Explain.
4. Locke uses the concept of “property” in both the common and narrow sense and in an extended sense
in which it refers to “lives and liberties” as well as estates (paras. 87 & 123, e.g.). How could today’s
liberals and conservatives both draw support for their understandings of the proper role of government in
the marketplace by focusing on one or the other of those definitions? Which move seems most in line
with Locke s general spirit? Explain.
f) 5. Compare Hobbes’s and Locke’s approach to the question of how the state should deal with religious
disputes. Analyze one or two of Locke’s arguments in f avor of a broad toleration of religious differences.
Can his requirement of public “neutrality” with regard to most religious commitments be extended to
other sorts of ethical disputes? How would a critic of toleration respond to his arguments? What is your
general view of this matter? Explain.
©Hobbes defines natural and civil freedom as the ability to act on and satisfy one’s desires in “the
absence of Opposition” from either “external impediments” or the “Artificial Chains, called Civill
Lowes. To what arguments about freedom is he responding? How does this “negative” conception of
freedom figure in the more general theories of Hobbes and Locke? Are there any important
considerations that it ignores? Explain.
…
Purchase answer to see full
attachment