Locke's merit as a taxonomist of the political individualism of his era also lies in his attempts to synthesize the inalienable natural law that belongs to the individual with a certain design of the state. Absolutism cannot be such a construct, at least in the sugary-sentimental forms of paternal rule and patriarchal monarchy. Locke proved this by criticizing “Rablagsva”).
Already one thing Locke recognized as the inalienability of the individual’s natural right to create 150 Gasf0 is the limitation of state power. Locke moves on. He paved the way for Montesquieu and gave inquisitive scientists food for debate about the primacy of the discovered theory of separation of powers.
Actually, in this creation of angering the authorities, the Locke-Aristotemanian point is in vain. (Stage, as is known, makes Hypateno siazzsayot1 $ state forms into right and wrong: right-wing for the benefit of the bearers of power themselves, or right-wing in the interests of the public good.
But you will already limit *) the legislative power itself, the source of which always remains the people, free to change
1). ouegfguup.
[fragment illegible in the scan of the first edition]
nope nooaaeraovya.” ao dbn rvynann PEJNY Z
— 303 the very form of right (constituent power) - shows how Locke tried to protect the natural rights of citizens even from the arbitrariness of the legislative chamber, to which the new state of England did not put legal precedents.
Based on the natural rights of man (among them Locke often mentions life and property), state power can only take away that which becomes a threat to individual and public security 2).
Locke extended his individualistic point of view to political economy, recognizing the work of man as a capital document for all objects of nature to which man applies it, turning them into property.
Without going into the details of Locke's studies, we must say that in history the philosophy of the state has led political individualism to the path of exploring the nature of government and building a state structure that recognizes and preserves the rights of the individual.
Until now, Locke’s predecessors, going towards the same goal, outlining the same principles, only in a less systematic form - (which, however, he also failed) - focused more on the tenesis of the individualistic state, as well as on studying and defining the properties of the individual that attract state cohabitation.
When the question arose about the forms corresponding to the basic premises of the theory of one or another author, he, as we saw in Spinoza, took the skeleton of the form from the repository of ancient philosophy of law, introducing into it, according to the ancient method, detailed amendments or original changes regarding the number of judges, rulers, etc.
1) The legislator has no right to delegate his power without the permission of the people, who alone have such a right.
Only 50 years later, after Locke, Montesquieu separated the individual right from the political and gave the theory of separation of powers the importance of guaranteeing the rights of the individual, and thus dismissed Aristotle’s point in vain.
But due to Montesquieu’s enormous contribution to the development of the French revolutionary doctrine, we will talk about him in connection with this last day.
ITS PRICHI REVISIONS CHIZY ITS
HEAD OF UC.
Philosophy of enlightenment, its relation to political individualism and zorma,
taken by this direction in the political silosomy of the XVS VBNA.
CHAPTER USH,
The philosophy of enlightenment, its relation to political individualism and the forms taken by this direction in the political philosophy of the 19th century.