Unlike Hobbes, Locke does not believe that people must have power over themselves wrested from them in order to create functional societies. On the contrary, Locke sees personal liberty as the key component of a society that works toward the individual's and the commonwealth's best interest.
IMPORTANT
Locke bases his ideas about slavery on the idea that freedom from arbitrary, absolute power is so fundamental that, even if one sought to, one could not relinquish it; it is therefore impossible for one to enlist into slavery voluntarily.
Locke believed that all people have a fundamental right to freedom from arbitrary and absolute power, which he saw as a natural and inherent aspect of human nature. He argued that this right to freedom is so fundamental that it cannot be given up, even if someone wanted to do so.
Based on this idea, Locke believed that it is impossible for someone to voluntarily become a slave. In other words, no one can legitimately surrender their own freedom or consent to be subjected to arbitrary and absolute power, even if they believe that doing so would be in their best interests or necessary for their survival. According to Locke, any system of slavery or forced servitude is therefore illegitimate and unjust, as it violates the fundamental rights of individuals to be free and self-determining.
The sovereign is the ruling force behind the contract; in the analogy between the abstracted contract and an artificial person, the concept of sovereignty is the soul of the artificial person and the sovereign itself, the head. This artificial person is a metaphor for the state in total, and Hobbes names this artificial person "Leviathan."
This sentence is using an analogy to explain the role of sovereignty in a contract and its relationship to an artificial person.
The sentence begins by stating that the "sovereign" is the ruling force behind the contract, meaning that the person or entity with the highest authority or power is responsible for creating and enforcing the terms of the contract.
Then, the sentence introduces an analogy between the contract and an artificial person. An artificial person is a legal concept used to describe a non-human entity, such as a corporation or government, that has certain legal rights and obligations.
The sentence goes on to say that in this analogy, the concept of sovereignty is the "soul" of the artificial person. This is because sovereignty refers to the supreme power or authority that is held by the entity, much like the soul is considered to be the essence or defining characteristic of a living being.
Finally, the sentence states that the sovereign itself is like the "head" of the artificial person, suggesting that the sovereign is the highest authority within the entity and is responsible for making decisions and enforcing the entity's will.
Overall, the sentence is using an analogy to explain the important role of sovereignty in a contract and how it relates to the concept of an artificial person.
that upon caution of the future time, aman ought to pardon the offences past of them that, repenting, desire it.For pardon is nothing but granting of peace; which though granted tothem that persevere in their hostility, be not peace, but fear; yet notgranted to them that give caution of the future time is sign of an aver-sion to peace, and therefore contrary to the law of nature.
The sixth law of nature is that when someone repents and asks for forgiveness, the person who was wronged should forgive them, especially if there is a promise to not repeat the offense in the future. Forgiveness is like granting peace, and refusing to forgive someone who is repentant and willing to change is a sign of being against peace, which goes against the law of nature.
that a manwhich receiveth benefit from another of mere grace endeavour that hewhich giveth it have no reasonable cause to repent him of his good will.
Just as justice depends on prior agreement, gratitude depends on prior generosity. This is the fourth natural law, which can be summarized as follows: when someone receives a gift or favor from another person without any obligation, they should make sure not to give the giver any reason to regret their kindness.
For the question is not of promises mutual, where there is no secu-rity of performance on either side, as when there is no civil power erectedover the parties promising; for such promises are no covenants: buteither where one of the parties has performed already, or where there isa power to make him perform, there is the question whether it be againstreason; that is, against the benefit of the other to perform, or not.
The question is about whether it's reasonable for someone to fulfill a promise they made when there is a guarantee that the other party will also fulfill their part of the promise. This is different from situations where there is no guarantee of fulfillment, such as when there is no authority to enforce the promise.
he questionethwhether injustice, taking away the fear of God (for the same fool hathsaid in his heart there is no God), not sometimes stand with that reasonwhich dictateth to every man his own good; and particularly then, whenit conduceth to such a benefit as shall put a man in a condition to neglectnot only the dispraise and revilings, but also the power of other men.
The question is whether committing acts of injustice, while disregarding the fear of God (as some people who deny God's existence do), can be consistent with reason when it serves to benefit a person by enabling them to ignore both criticism and the power of others.
In contracts the right passeth, not only where the words are of thetime present or past, but also where they are of the future, because allcontract is mutual translation, or change of right; and therefore he thatpromiseth only, because he hath already received the benefit for whichhe promiseth, is to be understood as if he intended the right should pass:for unless he had been content to have his words so understood, theother would not have performed his part first. And for that cause, inbuying, and selling, and other acts of contract, a promise is equivalentto a covenant, and therefore obligatory.
When people make agreements, the right to something is transferred. This happens not just when the words used are in the present or past tense, but also in the future tense. This is because making an agreement means changing the rights of each person involved. So, if someone promises something because they have already received a benefit, it's like they want to transfer the right. Otherwise, the other person wouldn't have done their part first. In buying, selling, and other agreements, a promise is just as important as a covenant and must be kept.
To lay down a man’s right to anything is to divest himself of theliberty of hindering another of the benefit of his own right to the same.For he that renounceth or passeth away his right giveth not to any otherman a right which he had not before, because there is nothing to whichevery man had not right by nature, but only standeth out of his way thathe may enjoy his own original right without hindrance from him, notwithout hindrance from another. So that the effect which redoundeth toone man by another man’s defect of right is but so much diminution ofimpediments to the use of his own right original.
If you give up your right to something, you are also giving up your freedom to stop someone else from having that same thing. Giving up your rights doesn't give anyone else new rights, it just means that you're letting them have what they already had a right to. When someone else's lack of rights benefits another person, it just means there are fewer obstacles for that person to exercise their own natural rights.
From this fundamental law of nature, by which men are commandedto endeavour peace, is derived this second law: that a man be willing,when others are so too, as far forth as for peace and defence of himselfhe shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and becontented with so much liberty against other men as he would allowother men against himself. For as long as every man holdeth this right,of doing anything he liketh; so long are all men in the condition of war.But if other men will not lay down their right, as well as he, then there isno reason for anyone to divest himself of his: for that were to exposehimself to prey, which no man is bound to, rather than to dispose him-
This law of nature says people should try to have peace. From this, there is a second law that says if other people are also willing to have peace, a person should be okay with giving up their right to do whatever they want, as long as it helps keep the peace and protects themselves. This means people should treat others the way they would want to be treated. If everyone does this, there will be peace. But if someone doesn't want to give up their right to do whatever they want, no one else has to give up their rights either, because that wouldn't be fair and would cause more problems.
A projective technique is an unstructured, indirect form of questioning that encourages respon-dents to project their underlying motivations, beliefs, attitudes, or feelings regarding the issues ofconcern.
Measuring the Unconscious: Projective Tests
A projective test is a personality test designed to let a person respondto ambiguous stimuli, presumably revealing hidden emotions and internal conflicts.
Rorschach Test, 1921: check if you see an image in pictures representing abstract shapes
Thematic Apperception Test, ca. 1930: interpretating ambiguous pictures to see what the patient thinks subconsciously
These tests try to reveal fears or thoughts that are uncovered/hidden
Problematic Aspects of Projective Tests * Inter-rater reliability (how consistent is it): two tests done by two psychoanalists might have different results * Test-retest reliability: the same test done in differents moment in time might have different results * Validity: wether it tests what it is actually supposed to measure
Other techniques to assess Associations: * Free Association: Respondents are asked to indicate the first comes to their mind in response to a stimulus * Stimulus Association: Respondents form a response in the form of a story, dialogue, or description. * Sentence/word Completion: Respondents have to complete an incomplete sentence/word-stem
PrOjective techniQues
1.An indirect form of asking questions that encourages respondents to project their underlying motivations
2.Psychoanalysis - Sigmund Freud * Id: pleasure principle, immediate gratification, drives(aggression and sex) * Super-Ego: conscience: values, ideals, shameand guilt * Ego: mediator, reality principle * Wishes and drives that are too threatening to the ego arerepressed to avoid painful emotions. * Such repressed unconscious wishes manifest themselves aspsychological and/or behavioral deficits.
3.Psychoanalysis * Thereare over 20 different versions of psychoanalysis * Meta-analyses of psychoanalytic treatments did not find improvement rates above spontaneous remission * Psychoanalysis takes up to 4 years, much longer than alternative
4.Critique of psychoanalisis * Karl Popper: Psychoanalysis is pseudoscienceas it is unfalsifiable * Tracing all human behavior to sexual wishes/drives is too simplistic * Scientific empirical testing is difficult due to problems in measuring the unconscious
The disadvantages of focus groups should not be overlooked.
Pitfalls of focus groups * Misuse: Do not consider results as conclusive * Misjudge: Be aware of (client and) researcher bias * Moderation: Results depend on good moderators (and they are rare) * Messy: Unstructured data is difficult to code, analyze, and interpret * Misrepresentation: A focus group is not a representative sample
The comments of one person can trigger unexpected reactions from others, leading to a snowballeffect in which participants respond to each other’s comments.
Like the kids in the video, because they all talked about sports Also, in the experiment in Hawthorne Works, Western Electric 1924-32, research showed that people worked harder when they knew they were being observed
fOcus GrOuP interviews
An interview conducted by a trained moderator among a smallgroup of respondents in an unstructured and natural manner.
detailed moderator’s outline
Key qualifications of a focus group moderator * Be kind * Allow to expand topic (with focus) * Involve silent and shy participants * Encourage participants to elaborate * Be firm
fOcus GrOuP interviews
See video on bboard