John Locke s Views On Human Nature Essay - 811 Words

itself, only a single ruler or an absolute monarch had the power or omnipotent vision to sufficiently rule a civilization. Whereas Locke saw a civilization that can be ruled in a democracy and every individual had a say in how the civilization can be ruled. Moreover, Hobbes’ outlook on human nature was generally bleak, most of his ideas were derived from the basis that all humans were, in fact, evil and that given the opportunity, a person would act on his or her own behalf before tending to the needs of others. He saw society as a dog-eat-dog, every-man-for-himself type of world and only the power of one absolute ruler can tame the madness. Although there were some very visible distinctions between the two, there is one constant belief that both philosophers share and that is the acceptance of human rights. Both men observed that all men should have the same rights as one another but greatly differed on the extent to which they were perceived. Locke thought that a humans rights were inalienable and cannot be taken away and that it was the governing body’s job to protect the rights of everyone. Whereas Hobbes also accepted the idea of human rights, he contrasted Locke’s view by maintaining that person alleviates his rights to the government and the government provides protection in return there by creating somewhat of a social contract. The theory of social contract is basically a morally justified agreement made between people that can potentially build an organized aShow MoreRelatedJohn Locke And Plato s Views On Human Nature1339 Words   |  6 PagesHuman Nature Human nature or man’s behavior in nature is a widely discussed topic in philosophy. Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Plato are among some of the many philosophers that have covered this topic in detail. John Locke expressed a generous view of human behavior. He states, â€Å"All mankind†¦ Being all equal and independent no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions. â€Å"1 . This quote refers to human nature, which is heavily discussed by John Locke. Locke is not theRead MoreJohn Locke s Views On Human Nature1602 Words   |  7 Pages James Madison and John Locke each created similar but somewhat different ideas about human nature. Whereas John Locke put more hope in human nature, Madison looked down on it with more critical analysis. Locke’s argument may provide few important points in general, but it is Madison who ultimately explained why people work in the specific way we see today and produce the government we enjoy. In fact, some of Locke’s arguments can be tied to Madison’s philosophy and be seen as useful explanationsRead MoreThe American Constitution And The Bill Of Rights1463 Words   |  6 PagesAddressing conventional teachings and qualities denoted the Enlightenment; there was a prominent propensity towards independence and accentuation on the thoughts of human advance. The American Constitution and the Bill of Rights are both results of the Enlightenment and thoughts of the philosophes, specifically John Locke. Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were both English philosophers,influential thinkers of the seventeenth century, both had confidence in a Social Contract and they both distributed books thatRead MoreJohn Locke And Thomas Hobbes1287 Words   |  6 Pagesproper political system, one must know how to balance and consider the nature of humankind and their rights. John Locke and Thomas Hobbes were both political philosophers who developed theories about how the government should work. They set up their theories around The Natural Law and the Social Contract Theory. Although John Locke and Thomas Hobbes had a similar goal, their beliefs and opinions were definitely not the same. John Locke and Thomas Hobbes both believed in the Natural Law and the SocialRead MoreThe State Of Nature : Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, And Jean Jacques Rousseau902 Words   |  4 Pagesstate of nature is the state were humans existed before government was ever created. There once was a period were there were not any rules, or laws to obey. In a state of nature there are no social goods. No farming, housing, technology, or education. With a state of nature there must be guaranteed that no one will harm one another, and people must rely on other s to keep their word, and not go back on what they say. Living in a state of nature was no way to live honestly. A state of nature was totalRead MoreMonarchy Vs. Democracy By Thomas Hobbes And John Locke1655 Words   |  7 Pages Monarchy vs Democracy Through assessing both monarchy and democracy from both perspectives of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, one can see that democracy creates the most beneficial outcome. Hobbes had a pessimistic view of people. He believed humans were selfish, doing anything to further their own position in life. Hobbes believed in an absolute monarchy, a government that gave all the power to a king or queen. Even though he distrusted democracy, he believed that a diverse group of representativesRead MoreThe Social Contract Theories Of Thomas Hobbes And John Locke1210 Words   |  5 PagesMahogany Mills Professor: Dr. Arnold Political Philosophy 4 February 2015 Compare and contrast the social contract theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke In the beginning of time, there was no government to regulate man. This caused a burden on society and these hardships had to be conquered, which is when a social contract was developed. The social contract theory is a model that addresses the questions of the origin of society and the legitimacy of the authority of the state over an individualRead MoreConflicting Visions of Freedom in John Stuart Mill’s On Liberty and John Locke’s The Second Treatise of Government1275 Words   |  6 PagesJohn Stuart Mill’s On Liberty and John Locke’s The Second Treatise of Government are influential literary works while which outlining the theoretical framework of each thinkers optimal state propose two conflicting visions of the very essence of man and his freedom. Locke and Mill have completely different views when it comes to how much freedom man should have in political society because they have obtained different views about man’s potential of inheriting pur e or evil behavior. In chapter twoRead MoreJohn Locke s Views On Private Property And Politics1133 Words   |  5 PagesEach Philosopher in the early modern world has different perspectives regarding private property and politics in society. Although John Locke, Niccolo Machiavelli, and Karl Marx/Frederick Engels are from different times their criticism are crucial onto the world. Being from different eras gives them a unique perspective of how one should rule or govern. Each philosopher displays his own ideas and can seemingly disagree with one another in their methods of government. Therefore when issues of maliciousRead MoreA Thesis Statement : Monarchy And Democracy1476 Words   |  6 Pagesof Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, one can see that democracy creates the most beneficial outcome. Today, many people associate the ideals Locke adopts with democracy. Although, in Locke’s book, Second Treatise of Government, he did not solely focus on democracy. He listed many types of government, not favoring any. He believed that as long as they adhere to his rules, they remain valid. As a result of looking through Thomas Hobbes’ view on monarchy and John Locke’s view on democracy, both perspectives

Keeping The Electoral College - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 7 Words: 2102 Downloads: 4 Date added: 2019/06/14 Category Politics Essay Level High school Topics: Electoral College Essay Did you like this example? The Electoral College has been around since the beginning of the country. This system is used to determine in a Presidential election year who has won the most electoral votes from all of the states and gets to become President. Over the last few years, several people have called for its abolishment. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Keeping The Electoral College" essay for you Create order However, I feel that the Electoral College should be kept. The Electoral College allows for all of the states to have a voice, not just states with big populations. Keeping the Electoral College allows us to maintain a fair process in the Presidential Election every four years and that by allowing each state to vote and not base the Presidency on the popular vote, we can have a fair election to decide who the President of the United States will be. The Electoral College was founded as a way for the President of the United States to be formally elected, with each state holding a certain number of electoral votes depending on how many people live in the state. Giving each state a certain number of electoral votes in the Electoral College gives each state the choice on who they believe deserves to win the Presidency. All of the states deserve to speak their mind on electing the President because states with huge populations such as Florida, Texas, and California should not have the power to pick the President but also allow states such as Idaho and Wyoming to have their say as well. Idaho and Wyoming may have different population numbers compared to Florida and California, but they should have every right to participate in the Electoral College as a member of the United States of America. In an article from the Washington Post written shortly after the 2016 Presidential Election, the authors of the article defend the use of the Electoral College as the primary method of electing the President. One section of the article that stood out was mentioning the idea of why the Electoral College was brought to fruition, allowing an equal opportunity for all fifty states- not just a few states, to cast their votes for President. The article also looks back at how Abraham Lincoln won the Presidency despite losing the popular vote, he still managed to win in the Electoral College, thus the southern states seceded because those states thought that the country would get rid of slavery. When reading that section of the article, I could understand why the southern states were angry because they wanted to keep slavery, but President Lincoln thought otherwise. In this case, the Electoral College divided a nation rather that united it. Jake Curtis, a reporter for the Washington Examiner, wrote a piece looking at the Electoral College and why it helps the smaller states in the U.S. Senate. He points out the Great Compromise as being the reason why small states such as Rhode Island and Delaware let their voices be heard not only in the Senate, but in the Presidential Election. Despite the bigger cities such as Los Angeles and New York having a big portion of the American population, smaller cities such as Boise, Idaho and Wichita, Kansas have the right to speak just as LA and New York do. In the recent U.S. Senate election, we saw that some states decided that they would like to be represented differently starting in January 2019 than they currently are today. Those states have the right to speak in the Senate as part of being in the United States. If not for the two senators per state regulation, states such as California, New York, and Florida would have multiple senators, while the smaller states may have one or t wo depending on the population of the state. Having the right to equal representation in the Senate should also matter to the Presidential Election as all states are seen as being united, hence the United States of America. Martin Diamond wrote a journal titled The Electoral College and the American Idea of Democracy. In the journal, he takes a look at the importance of the Electoral College in American history and the benefits of keeping the Electoral College. Diamond, on page three, mentions that George Washington was elected President based on the popular vote. However, in 1796, when the Presidency was between John Adams and Thomas Jefferson, two very well respected men at that time, the electors were tasked with making a difficult decision as to who should succeed George Washington as President. The Electoral College, since the election of 1796, has been tasked with the choice of electing the President every four years. Diamondrs argument on page three is that the founders did not want to create controversy with the Presidential election and suggested that there should be a group of electors charged with the task to make the election more democratic. His argument is valid because although we have pe ople claiming every Presidential election cycle that the Electoral College should be scrapped, the founding fathers wanted to establish the Electoral College so that the popular vote did not ruin the integrity of the election. Page seven of the article written by Diamond takes a look at Electoral College when someone who wins the Electoral vote but loses the popular vote assumes the Presidency. In 2016, we saw this when the Democratic nominee, Hillary Clinton won the popular vote but failed to secure the most important vote, the Electoral College, to her Republican opponent Donald Trump. According to the website FactCheck.org, this has happened in the past when George W. Bush, John Quincy Adams, Rutherford B. Hayes, and Benjamin Harrison all lost the popular vote but snuck away with the Electoral College. In class, we discussed the 2000 election and how Florida kept going back and forth between Bush and Gore as to who was the winner of the state, with the vote requiring several recounts the weeks following the election. If Bush had not won Florida, he likely would not have became the 43rd President of the United States. When Donald Trump won, those who supported Hillary Clinton argued that she should becom e the 45th President because she won the popular vote. However, those who sought to use the popular vote as their argument for Hillary winning the election should look back on the history of past Presidential elections where the candidate who won the popular vote ended up losing because they did not get more than 270 electoral votes necessary to be elected. On the same website, it is noted that George W Bush also did not win the popular vote against Democratic challenger Al Gore. What should also be noted is that Trump and George W Bush are Republicans, including both Rutherford B. Hayes and Benjamin Harrison while John Quincy Adams was not a Republican. It is really interesting to see that the candidates other than John Quincy Adams who lost the popular vote but won the college shows that the Democrats are known for winning the popular vote, but dont know how to secure the electoral votes. In class, we discussed the campaign trail for 2016. During that discussion, the states that Trump won were states that he frequented the most because he knew that he could secure victories in those states. He also made it a point to visit swing states such as Pennsylvania, Florida, and Michigan due to their high electoral votes. Clinton, on the other hand, failed to spend more time in those states because while the west coast and New England states along with her home state of New York tend to vote blue, she could have spent more time in the swing states and turned them blue rather than red. If one is seeking to win the Presidential election, that person must continue to visit the states that not only are swing states, but states that have low ele ctoral votes hold just as big of an influence as those with a higher number of electoral votes. The counterargument in this case would be that the Electoral College should not exist anymore. Before Donald Trump ran for President, in 2012 he strongly opposed the reelection of President Obama and took his thoughts to Twitter suggesting that the Electoral College should be abolished. At one point or another, members of both the Democratic and Republican parties have expressed their frustration of the Electoral College when either party loses the Presidential election. If you were to say that the Electoral College needs to go, my suggestion would be that you should look back at why the Electoral College was created to allow equal opportunities across all of the states to duly elect the President. One person might argue that the electors may not like who their staters votes are going to, and depending on the staters laws concerning electoral voters, decide whether to resign from their position as an elector or just accept the results. I would never want to be put in the spot as an E lector because there would be too much pressure on me to cast my vote which is what Democrats did in 2016. That year, several protests occurred at and outside of meetings where members of the Electoral College across the country got together in their respective states to cast their ballots. To me, that is disrespectful to have your meeting disrupted, but at the same time, these protestors do have a right to be mad that their candidate lost and to put pressure on electors by voting against the candidate that won their state. When the Texas delegates voted for President two years ago, in a video on Youtube, protestors were outside the capitol building in Austin demanding that the electors do not vote for Trump, even though Trump won their state. The electors ignored the protestors, thus allowing Trump to become President. Abolishing the Electoral College sounded like a good idea to the Democrats, but it did not work in their favor two years ago. Neither did it work for Donald Trump on Twitter in 2012 when calling out the Electoral College ater President Obama won a second term. Calling for the abolishment of the Electoral College does not do both major parties any good, it only causes more tension. The Electoral College is an important part of American history when deciding who should become the President of the United States. If we were to get rid of the Electoral College and allow the popular vote to determine the President, chaos would ensure regarding the election, creating controversy every four years. In the United States, every state has the right to cast votes for President, regardless of the population of the state. Only the states with big populations such as California, Florida, and New York would get to decide who the President should be, and that is not fair. The Electoral College was founded on the basis to keep our elections fair for all of the states. To some, the popular vote should be the way that we should elect the President. In this case, Trump, George W Bush, John Quincy Adams, Benjamin Harrison, and Rutherford B. Hayes would not have been elected if there was no Electoral College. Today, Hillary Clinton would have been the first female President in the hi story of the United States if the election was based off of popular vote. The popular vote should be used for lesser offices such as Mayor of cities, Governors of states, and those we elect to serve in Congress. The popular vote should not be used to the elect the President of the United States as it only allows states with large populations to have a say, thus silencing the smaller states. By having the Electoral College, the rights of each state is valued and so is the vote that is cast by each state. Sources Cummings, W. (2016, November 12). Trump called Electoral College a disaster in 2012 tweet. Retrieved December 4, 2018, from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2016/11/09/trump-called-electoral-college-disaster-2012-tweet/93575326/ Curtis, J., OlegAlbinsky. (2017, September 21). Defending the Electoral College, and federalism, is crucial to our republic. Retrieved December 4, 2018, from https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/defending-the-electoral-college-and-federalism-is-crucial-to-our-republic Diamond, M. (1977). Http://www.historystudies.net/dergi//birinci-dunya-savasinda-bir-asayis-sorunu-sebinkarahisar-ermeni-isyani20181092a4a8f.pdf. History Studies International Journal of History, 10(7), 1-22. doi:10.9737/hist.2018.658 FOX 4 News Dallas-Fort Worth. (2016, December 19). Texas Electoral College Vote. Retrieved December 4, 2018, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgtWaIeAVRA Gore, D. (2016, December 23). Presidents Winning Without Popular Vote. Retrieved December 03, 2018, from https://www.factcheck.org/2008/03/presidents-winning-without-popular-vote/ Guelzo, A., Hulme, J. (2016, November 15). In defense of the electoral college. Retrieved December 2, 2018, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2016/11/15/in-defense-of-the-electoral-college/?noredirect=onutm_term=.06d8caedf67a

Martin Luther King Vs Malcolm X - 1436 Words

Selene Sandoval Professor Solheim History 108 CRN # 20244 16 October 2016 Martin Luther King VS Malcolm X Ronald Regan once said: â€Å"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn t pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same.† In fact, American history has had a great deal of leaders that brought change by improving the lives of others. These leaders introduced new ideas, models, and theories to society breaking away from their social norms. Despite the fact, that we’ve had several remarkable individuals in American History it is equally important to remember that no one individual portrays any given event the same way. Although, their goals were similar, Martin Luther King and Malcolm X had different approaches towards the modern American Civil Rights Movement. In order to understand the importance of these two men, lets first examine what the Civil Rights Movement was in America. For centauries, African Americans have been minorities in society. Author Britta Waldschmidt-Nelson stated that, â€Å"Slavery as a legal institution existed in North America for more than 130 years before the founding of the United States in 1776.† (Pg.5) In 1865 the North won the Civil War, and also during that year the abolishment of slavery across the whole United States had accorded with the passing of the Thirteen Amendment. Despite the fact, that the United States passed such Amendment, mostShow MoreRelatedMartin Luther King vs. Malcolm X Essay825 Words   |  4 PagesTwo of the greatest know civil rights speakers in the United States was Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm x. Both of these men had two very different views on what they thought would be the best way for blacks to get equality. Martin Luther King Jr. believed in his main philosophy which was non violent resistance. Martin used the teachings from Ghandi to teach African Americans how to use non violent resistance as a way to earn equality. He also believed that blacks should try to find commonRead MoreMartin Luther King Jr. vs. Malcolm X997 Words   |  4 PagesMartin Luther King Jr. vs. Malcolm X Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X both fought for the same goal, but had different ways of achieving this goal. They both fought against civil rights and were leaders in the civil rights movement. The way they were brought up is a good explanation for their differences; King was brought up in a wealthy family, while X was raised in the ghetto to a poor family. Both fought against unfair laws, Social Discrimination, and Racial segregation, but theyRead MoreMalcolm X vs. Martin Luther King Jr.1723 Words   |  7 Pagesthis momentous time in United States history. Speeches during this period served as a means to inspire and assemble a specific group of people, for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X it was the black community that needed to rise up in hopes of achieving equal rights and voting rights for the blacks. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X were two of the most prominent leaders and orators at the heart of the Civil Rights Movement. Although both leaders possessed the same objectives, theirRead More Dr. Martin Luther King vs. Malcolm X Essay739 Words   |  3 PagesDr. Martin Luther King vs. Malcolm X Martin Luther King and Malcolm X were both black men, fighting for freedom in a white society. However, the word fighting meant different things for each of them. For Malcolm X, it literally means violence, as he believed in an eye for an eye. Martin Luther King, however, believed in peaceful protest, such as the Montgomery Bus Protests. MALCOLM X Born Malcolm Little in Omaha, Nebraska on May 19, 1925, Malcolm X was Read MoreMalcolm X Vs. Martin Luther King Jr. Essay1717 Words   |  7 Pagesthis momentous time in United States history. Speeches during this period served as a means to inspire and assemble a specific group of people, for Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X it was the black community that needed to rise up in hopes of achieving equal rights and voting rights for the blacks. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X were two of the most prominent leaders and orators at the heart of the Civil Rights Movement. Although both leaders possessed the same objectives, theirRead MoreMartin Luther King Jr. vs. Malcolm X1263 Words   |  6 Pages* Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X are two people on different ends of the scales, with totally different up-bringings. * King was brought up by a rich black family,with a good education, and a good chance at life. He was a black aristocrat, and a wealthy man. * Malcolm X was brought up in the ghetto, and had to learn to defend himself against racist white children. He was deptived of his father, who was found dead, murdered by a white mob. His mother became mentally ill so he wasRead MoreEssay about Malcolm X vs Martin Luther King Jr1804 Words   |  8 Pagesopposed civil rights activists Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X. In the 1960’s the African American community became increasingly active in the struggle for civil rights. Although the concept race is an arbitrary societal construct based on the color of an individual’s skin and his or her geographic origin, it has had a profound impact not only on the founding and formation of our country but also the development modern American society. King and Malcolm X are two powerful men in particularRead MoreThe Civil Rights Movement712 Words   |  3 Pagesthough the actions taken by Malcolm X were of good intentions, they ended up causing a ripple between African Am ericans. On the other hand Martin Luther King Jr. identified that if people were going to respond to hatred with more hatred then there will be little chances for change and substance which was never understood by Malcolm. He was, of course, powerful and strong as an Africa American commanding huge followers and believers, but things did not end well as Malcolm X dies in the hand of his ownRead MoreEssay Philosophies and Tactics of Dr. King and Malcolm X1492 Words   |  6 Pagesminorities. Among them, Martin Luther King and Malcolm X had an everlasting effect on the treatment of minorities in the United States. Although their philosophies and tactics differed greatly, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X helped shape the Civil Rights Movement and make the United States a better place for people regardless of their race. Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X had different beliefs and goals for the Civil Rights Movement. While Martin Luther King Jr. took a more peacefulRead MoreCivil War Movement : Martin Luther King Jr Malcolm X1212 Words   |  5 Pages Research paper History 11.21 December 23, 2014 Civil War Movement: Martin Luther King Jr/ Malcolm X Many years after blacks had received citizenship and the right to vote there was still much bias against them. Because of their skin color African Americans hadn’t been treated fairly and did not have the same rights as whites. In the

Making A Change free essay sample

Being only 11 years old, I walked into the Keller Natatorium. I became engulfed in the smell of chlorine and fast-paced chaos of a swim meet. It was my summer league swim team’s regional meet that I had attended before, numerous times. Yet, at this meet every year the outcome – of whether or not I would qualify for the state meet – was never predetermined. I glanced down at my arm where my mom had carefully written my events, heats, and lane assignments in Sharpie. First up: my relay and best chance to qualify for state. Although I was only on the â€Å"B† relay for my team and the chance of my relay qualifying was still very slim, I cheered as loud as I could possibly cheer, swam as fast as I could possibly swim, and nervously watched as my final teammate came crashing into the wall. A 5th place popped up next to our lane number. We will write a custom essay sample on Making A Change or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page Only the top 4 finishers would advance and qualify for state. After the race, I forced a fake smile as my parents ran up to hug me to mask my devastation. I pretended to listen to the meaningless words of encouragement from my coach saying how well I swam. Finishing well out of the top 4 in my following two individual events, I proceeded to go home in a sullen and defeated mood. This disappointment led me to realize that I was the only one with the power to change the outcome and that I would make a change. The days of being an average summer league swimmer were over for me. The following fall, I decided to join a year- round USA Swimming swim team. It is a long two-hour round trip car ride to make it to practice everyday after school, but it was a sacrifice that my parents and I chose to make. This decision of commitment and sacrifice was one of the best decisions I have ever made in my life. My passion for the sport of swimming has never waned, and dedicating myself to push beyond my failures instead of wallowing in self-pity was one of the greatest life lessons I have learned. I have since continued to swim year round and the benefits have been tremendous. They range from what is seen on paper – the drastic time drops and never since failing to qualify for the summer league state meet – to learning responsibility, self-motivation, and how to be a good teammate. Albert Einstein once said, â€Å" Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.† I chose to make a change. I chose to take the initiative to make myself a better swimmer and more importantly – a better person and will continue to do the same throughout my college years and the rest of my life.