The Purpose for This Paper Is to Discuss the Similarities and Differences Between the State of Nature and the State of War

The purpose for this paper is to discuss the similarities and differences between The State of Nature and The State of War.

Locke describes the state of nature as one of equality; everyone in this state is exactly the same as everyone else. There is no one that is better than anyone else, no matter what. Ranks, social standings, and other stigmas don’t matter in this state. What matters is the fact that everyone is human and deserves the same respect as everyone else. A quote that fits perfectly with this mode of being is the one of doing onto others, as you would want others to do unto you. I feel that this quote sums up how Locke envisions his state of nature because it expresses how all people deserve the same respect no matter what position the hold in society. I often notice how many people of white-collar jobs treat people of blue-collar jobs with a type of attitude that they are somehow more powerful than the working class. Even in this college I’ve noticed how some professors have an opinion that they are better than the some of the staff here. I truly feel that this is because of a social stigma deeply embedded with in the structure of our society. Something that is woven into this society telling people that one isn’t good enough unless one has had a formal education, and the more time and money a person puts into the education system the better.

Another point I’d like to discuss about this piece is the state of liberty Locke talks of. He starts off by saying how man is not given complete freedom to do whatever he wants when he wants, but man does have full liberty to order self and possessions. Then Locke clarifies himself saying how that statement does not mean men have the right to destroy himself or any animal/person that maybe in his care at the time. Bringing me to the conclusion that “mercy killing”, suicides and murders involving loved ones were not looked highly according to Locke. This statement has the potential to change the views of this practice forever, if only more people read this piece. For example, in an oath that has been around since 300 B.C., “To please no one will I prescribe a deadly drug nor give advice which may cause his death”. Yet the ancient Romans and Greeks were one of the first to disregard that line in the Hippocratic oath and felt that life did not need to be protected at all; hence the value for life slowly diminishing over time. However if all aspiring doctors and nurses had to read and understand the oath and Locke’s State of Nature as a requirement to their degree. This would help ensue the fact that “helping” to kill any living thing is wrong, regardless of the intentions.