You will prepare and submit a term paper on Lockes and Kants Moral Theories in the Modern Society. Your paper should be a minimum of 1250 words in length. The challenge of ability to reason out and the existence of moral standards allure humans to continually search for what could be universally good.
Many moral theories have been formulated by famous philosophers like Socrates, Aristotle and Plato during the time of ancient ethics. Today, drastic changes in society can be observed with regards to its moral standards. Two remarkable theories are to be discussed in this paper, namely John Locke’s Natural Rights Theory and Immanuel Kant’s Kantian Theory. The comparative analysis in terms of the applications and effects of these theories to all humans in the modern setting is the key point of argumentation.
John Locke is a 17th-century Philosopher most famous in his contributions to political philosophy (Tuckness). He is the proponent of the Natural Rights Theory which is grounded in the concept of a state of nature, political power and natural rights. In the book “Disputed Moral Issues” by Mark Timmons, he pointed out the state of nature as one with an imagined or actual pre-political condition without government, a state of equality without hierarchy, and state of liberty without a license all governed by the law of nature. Simply said, our society is in a state of nature if without the involvement of political thought and governance. In this context, Locke proposes to understand the nature of political power and the limits placed on it by natural rights.
Before the emergence of Locke’s theory, the concept of natural law already existed expressing that whatever situation or agreement people have, there will be certain moral truths applicable to all humans. It gives significance to natural duties. In Locke’s perspective “no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions” (Timmons 55). With this, other prominent thinkers of philosophy claimed that Locke recognizes natural law duties only in situations non- conflicting to personal preservations of human .beings. . .