Rhetorical: Locke

Written in 2017


           John Locke’s second treatise on government aims to demonstrate the fundamental idea of independence. John Locke’s Second Treatise on Government illustrates the essential importance of rhetoric and language in works of persuasive non-fiction. Locke presents an argument in defense of democratic government, led by the majority. He relies upon a number of different rhetorical tools in his discussion, including ethos or authority, comparison, figurative language, and analogy. While the lasting political influence of Locke’s writing is undeniable, his rhetorical skill contributed to his importance and historical relevance. 

Locke uses upon both his own authority and divine authority in this text from the late 17th century. As a philosopher, he was a learned man and could produce a thoughtful and logical argument, but as a man in a religious era, divine authority proved even more critical to his discussion. Divine authority, including references to free will as a biblical principle, supported and gave credence to Locke’s discussion of community, society, and government. While today, ethos might be the result of education or other credentials, in Locke’s time, the highest authority, was from God. 

During the course of his work, Locke compares a voluntary society or government to the state of nature. The state of nature is man living without government. In the state of nature, choices are made on an individual basis, rather than a communal one. In joining together to form a community, one gives up some fundamental rights present in the state of nature. This comparison provides insight into the benefits of community, but also the sacrifices that come with choosing to live together and form a majority government. 

John Locke uses figurative language and analogies to make clear how government must function. If a government cannot be ruled by the majority, it would be like Cato entering the theatre and leaving, or accomplishing nothing at all. A government that can accomplish nothing would turn the Leviathan, or constitution, into something utterly weak. Only through acceptance of majority rule, or sacrificing the personal rights associated with the state of nature, can the society or community survive and continue. The simile, or comparison to Cato’s actions, suggests the possible futility of government, while the analogy comparing the constitution to the Leviathan helps the reader to comprehend, in clear and concrete terms, the necessity of legal, majority rule. 

According to Locke, government begins with an act of free will on the part of the individual. These individuals agree, of their own choice, acting independently, to join together to form a community. Together, they look out for one another and act for the greater good of the whole. In this, the needs of the majority must, at least some of the time, outweigh the will and desires of the individual, Locke’s argument is familiar to the modern reader, but it was new to the reader of the 17th century. Through language and rhetoric, Locke made his argument on the basis of divine authority and free will as given by god. His use of comparisons, including both the comparison between government and the state of nature, and broader comparisons and analogies helps to make the abstract ideal of government and majority rule graspable and concrete for the reader. 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

ArtificiaI General Intelligence Safety Fundamentals Notes

A year, introspectively summarized

Vicissitude