Private Property: John Locke And Jean-Jacques Rousseau

1308 Words3 Pages

In the sixteen to nineteenth centuries, philosophers such as John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau had many opposing thoughts, opinions and very distinctive notions on obtaining and owning your own private property. Locke ultimately believes that private property is a vital necessity in society and has a positive effect on mankind. In contrast, Rousseau perceives property as the root of the corruption and ultimate disgrace of society. Private property is worthwhile and a right god gave to individuals according to Locke, meanwhile, to Rousseau it is only meaningful when society as a whole will benefit equally.
John Locke believes that man has a right to private property. According to Locke, God gave man this plentiful earth, with all of its plants and animals, to work on and nourish our bodies with. Locke credits god to …show more content…

For Locke, labor includes “picking up acorns from the ground, gathering apples from wild trees, tracking deer in the forest, and catching fish in the ocean” (Smith, 1). Labor can range from doing regular everyday actions to production of goods that involve effort and times. Under Locke’s opinion of what labor is, as long as it as an act consisting of purpose and determination, whether or not you produce a physical object, still counts as labor. When you want your own private property, putting in labor and effort, even if not for the greater good like creating means for production. In John Locke’s writings, ultimately the rich have an advantage, while he doesn’t focus too much on the greatest good for society, the rich and powerful seem to have an advantage and trump individuals not as wealthy. He focuses on the aspects of each individual, and doesn’t really focus on the side effects towards the society as a whole, which Rousseau will discuss

Open Document