Locke talks about how someone willing to violate the law of nature is at a state of war toward his fellow human beings; other people have the right to kill this person because he’s such a threat to their basic rights. Briefly, come up with your own example of this concept. Describe in adequate detail what’s going on in your own hypothetical scenario, making use Locke’s notions on the state of nature and the state of war.
Locke contends that in the state of nature, there is a natural limit to property: we can possess only as much as we can use, only as much as make can employ before it goes to waste. E.g., I can possess one deer which I kill, but I cannot possess 10 deer because, I could not make use of them prior to their going to waste. Briefly, discuss why you think Locke is correct in this notion or why he is incorrect regarding the natural limit of property. Present a concise but well-argued position either for or against Locke.
Welcome to Legit Writing
