Locke on War and Peace

Table of contents :
1......Page 1
2......Page 2
3......Page 3
4......Page 4
5......Page 5
6......Page 6
7......Page 7
8......Page 8
9......Page 9
10......Page 10
11......Page 11
12......Page 12
13......Page 13
14......Page 14
15......Page 15
16......Page 16
17......Page 17
18......Page 18
19......Page 19
20......Page 20
21......Page 21
22......Page 22
23......Page 23
24......Page 24
25......Page 25
26......Page 26
27......Page 27
28......Page 28
29......Page 29
30......Page 30
31......Page 31
32......Page 32
33......Page 33
34......Page 34
35......Page 35
36......Page 36
37......Page 37
38......Page 38
39......Page 39
40......Page 40
41......Page 41
42......Page 42
43......Page 43
44......Page 44
45......Page 45
46......Page 46
47......Page 47
48......Page 48
49......Page 49
50......Page 50
51......Page 51
52......Page 52
53......Page 53
54......Page 54
55......Page 55
56......Page 56
57......Page 57
58......Page 58
59......Page 59
60......Page 60
61......Page 61
62......Page 62
63......Page 63
64......Page 64
65......Page 65
66......Page 66
67......Page 67
68......Page 68
69......Page 69
70......Page 70
71......Page 71
72......Page 72
73......Page 73
74......Page 74
75......Page 75
76......Page 76
77......Page 77
78......Page 78
79......Page 79
80......Page 80
81......Page 81
82......Page 82
83......Page 83
84......Page 84
85......Page 85
86......Page 86
87......Page 87
88......Page 88
89......Page 89
90......Page 90
91......Page 91
92......Page 92
93......Page 93
94......Page 94
95......Page 95
96......Page 96
97......Page 97
98......Page 98
99......Page 99
100......Page 100
101......Page 101
102......Page 102
103......Page 103
104......Page 104
105......Page 105
106......Page 106
107......Page 107
108......Page 108
109......Page 109
110......Page 110
111......Page 111
112......Page 112
113......Page 113
114......Page 114
115......Page 115
116......Page 116
117......Page 117
118......Page 118
119......Page 119

Citation preview

Oxford UniversilJ Prtss, Amtn /louit, London E.C.4 Gl.>5(;0\Y NIVI vo•1t Jl(t.)IUo\Y C:AW:U1'fA.

'l'tJttO,,TO M.AD•A'

weL.IOUIOl1' K�l.AC.IU

e.4rlt TOWtf UIAOAN WAJll.OfH

WZLl.lliCiTOl'I

KUA.LA 1.UMFUll Jt.C(iltA

LOCKE ON WAR AND PEACE BY

RICHARD H. COX

OXFORD AT THE CLARENDON PRESS

1960

PREFACE THAT war has always been a grave problem for man is perhaps small consolation to those who must today face that problem in its most urgent and terrifying form. In fact, the consolation which in previous ages might have arisen from philosophic reflection upon the polar character of war and peace in human existence seems today to be of problematic value as compared to the value of forthright action dedicated to finding a way out of our perilous situation. But the situa­ tion in which we are called upon to act proves then to be ironic in a double sense. First, man's pride at having released seemingly unlimited power to do his every bidding is accom­ panied by a shadow of fear-fear that in spite of all he may do, this power he thought himself master of will prove to be the means of his destruction. Second, the demands for action tend to depreciate the dispassionate, philosophic analysis of the nature of war and peace simply because such a pursuit seems to be irrelevant to our present perils. The irony is then that f� andpractical ur�, which ari�t of extt_aord_in!r}'.£.O :'l'.� r2v�!:_n atu re, t�nd of man's realizati tonegate thatwn1ch traditionally was beli�ved ts> co11filitute the core of111s 9wn natu!:_e: the capacity for ref!ecti:v.e.$elf­ knowled e and for contemplative investigation of the whole within which he lives. -However, this irony may be the beginning of wonder and reflection concerning how we came to be where we are. We may even be led to ask whether the long modern experiment, which culminates with the project of conquering the heavens, did not contain within itself from the beginning the poten­ tiality of destroying 'this goodly frame, the earth', and of reducing to cosmic irony Hamlet's vision of the dual nature of man: 'in action how like an angel! in apprehension how like a god l'



g

PREFACE

PREFACE

Whatever the answer to this question may be, the present study throws light upon it by pointing to the fact that for cke, as for us, the �teali s sueis�t.Qf man�power over 1 ' . nature The difference is this: Locke (like Bacon and other 'Cmitributors to the modern philosophy of power) lived only in distant anticipation of the effective realization of such power, and with apparently no anticipation of its full con­ sequences for the political order. But man now possesses such power. It has revolutionized war and political relations, and so far defies legal or political control. To those of us who live in the midst of this revolution the seemingly academic question of what Locke meant by the 'state of nature' thus takes on new meaning; for in that conception the deepest root of the connexion between him and ourselves i s to be found. The purpose of this study is not therefore simply to present an interpretation of one more facet of Locke's political philosophy; it is also to suggest that the link be­ tween the past and the present via the medium of political philosophy may e even more complex than we had pre­ viously suspected., The generation of the idea for this study, and the execu­ tion of its design, owe much to the stimulation, advice, and criticism of many people, but most especially to Professors Jerome G. Kerwin, IIans J. Morgenthau, and Leo Strauss of the University of Chicago, and to Dr. Kenneth vV. Thompson, now Associate Director of Social Sciences for the Rockefeller Foundation in New York. In addition, I �ish to acknowledge my gratitude to the following organiza­ �1ons a.nd persons: the Rockefeller Foundation for making 1t possible for me to spend a year in Oxford working on the Lovelace collection of Locke's papers; the Curators and the Librarian of the Bodleian Library for permission to consult the Lovelace collection and to quote from it, as well as for the unfailing assistance and courtesy of the staff; Dr. W. von Leyden for the use of his indispensable catalogue to the papers in the Lovelace collection; the Rockefeller Committee and the Institute of Social Sciences of the University of

California at Berkeley for their grants in support of cornole­ tion of this book; llie Smultea, John Eberhardt, and Ma;cus Raymond for their valuable assistance in research and pre­ paration of the manuscript and index; Lenore Heaphey for her typing of the manuscript; and the Delegates of the Clarendon Press for their undertaking to publish the book, as well as those members of the Press who have been un­ failingly patient and helpful in guiding the work through production while I have been many thousands of miles away. I alone remain responsible for the opinions expressed and the errors which have gone undetec.ted. I owe a special word of thanks to my wife, whose en­ couragement, criticism, help, and indeed forbearance, have sustained me in bringing this book to print. R.H. C.

viii

Lo

Q_

Btr!ttlty, California 15 ll4arch 1960

ix

CONTENTS ' llEFERENCfS TO LOCKE S WORKS

xm

INTRODUCTION

I.

xv

On the Problern of Interpreting Locke's

1

Tuo Treatises