John Locke and Marx

John Locke and Marx

John Locke and Marx have placed property and labor at the center of their theoretical models, yet their theories are wholly different. While Locke claims that Labor does confer the private property right, making private property preservation a cortical element of his political theories. Marx thinking that the labor of the proletariats is usually exploited by capitalist production system and capitalism will always alienate people from their labor. As such, Marx has defended the theory which is aiming at eliminating alienation and exploitation through the means of production that enhances public control,

John Locke ha portrayed people in the natural state before money was created as needing work so that they cud survive. Human beings require work gather and store food, hunt, build, weapons, obtain clothes, and others, human beings are never born with shelter, cotes, weaponry, compared to animals, human beings also lack the extreme strength that animals have too. As a result, a human being has to work to flourish. He or she must work closely with other people to divide necessary labor and start focusing on a single thing at a time. The labor division enhances typically the capabilities to survive and thrive. A human beings should always accomplish his work as a person, regardless of collaboration with other people

A human being possesses autonomy over himself or herself and is still response for his outcomes and actions over and within himself. He had ownership of property, and his work product, such is what is called the property artistry model. The worker is always accomplished by his or her doings. He or she will spend his energy his time, his efforts. For instance,one should gather fruits, but take the fruits may be fruits for all to gather, to avoid hurting others, he or she will only gather what is enough for him so that the remaining food is not going to spoil. The concept of anti-spoiling is critical as it helps in preventing the idea to infringe n right of other people to same fruit tree as it s not owned privately, therefore, it allows benefit for many people. Incase every person is going to gather more than what he or she needs, and it goes to spoil, it s going to leave many hunger and at the danger of dying, it s critical recalling that such occurred before money was invented—however the currency spoilage cannot take ace in a dynamic economy,

If a person decides to work for another, he or she has made a contractual agreement with the individuals they are working for and their compensation or payment shall be guided by the contract. An individual decides to some weight of acorns for another to be compensated with 5 tobacco pounds. There is no other person with authority entering the exchange and making different declaration. The two have ability to change the contract because of the ownership f personal property they have. Their actions and their work such is applicable equality for a capitalist system and the capitalistic state.

Locke also, refers to God who has installed man with necessary reason and it is God’s property. The paradox to own oneself when being held by God as the standard of what is going to happen. The moral sentiment, like Adam Smith, are crucial for john Locke in both post and prior capitalism or that respecting the God-given rights that men acquires to men. Such rights to property, liberty, life, being from God and nature may not be subjugated by the governance or other people.

N the contrary, Karl Marx, has no belief in private property ownership as a production means, capitalism. He is critical of the capitalistic system since he disapproves the industrial revolution had many flaws, his capitalism criticism, and the industrial revolution is simple. It alienates ad exposes many people and leaves them as slaves to a system of the rich owning the production means. The rich pay low wages to those who work in factories making the products.

Even though Marx is not acknowledging the capitalism benefits, his manifesto is made up of the remover of elite class private property and handing it to the workers hands in the firms. He thinks that individuals are better off of theory work as the factory owners and ultimately, have machines of dong work that will sustain their lives in this utopia.

Before the machines were used for products creation the workers need to come together and forcefully take control of he and start owning he factories, Marx never appear to be thinking that the bosses or owner private property maters, Marx, same to Rousseau thinks private property is a something that society crates, not nature. Marx has not declared the process through which creation of private property occurs. He is not stipulating the organ labor formation, also, Marx believes that incase a person owns anything, and they do things that others will see as wrong they do not have rights to that personal property.

Karl Marx created labor theory of value which claims that product’s economic value is determined by the amount of work and time pit into the making of a product. Marx goes ahead to use the concept to justify the means of production where workers should own them, accumulated labor, grant capitals. Fr the theory of Marx, the past alienation and exploitations of working class needs past capitals should be allocated to working people s that the justice concept can be accomplished,

These two philosophers have great ideas in concept of property and labor. Locke is right to claim that property is always found within people and people for their owner, not infringing on others. The government should protect property, liberty, and life Marx is right to say that workers need always to be considered when a company is run. The trained staff provides a high service level.

John Locke will not agree with Karl Marx on the issues of the right to property, life. Locke would claim that the working class is not entitled in any way to the rightfully acquire the property of people owning the factories is wrog. It entails infringing on liberty life and property of the owners and destroying justice. The assumption that wealthy are evil innately and taking advantage of the working class is not true and is inaccurate historically. Capitalism has its benefits it has saved lives helped many people across the globe

Nietzsche an admirer of Aristophanes, blames Socrates for corrupting the Greek life, is the comic Socrates of the cuds I fact as corrosive to Greek civilizations Nietzsche portrays his as being.

Socrates is known to many people as an intellectual personal and political philosopher made history. His death is majorly seen as a terrible mistake in the democratic atmen’s reputation. Socrates is perceived by many as a victim of oppression and intolerance who worked hard and in the end dying for civil liberties. However, Socrates seems to have been the manic critique of Nietzsche, he accuses him for being responsible for Greek culture which acquired tragic proportions and comic aspects surrounded by poetic and speculative account of Greek tragedy account and its prophecy of romantic Germany rebirth, despite the fact that he has acknowledged Socrates sense of humor and irony, Nietzsche think that the he is able to identify the different dialectical tricks of Socrates so that he can discern and disclose the Socratism dangerous essence and how he courted the young like Plato.

While some philosophical establishment do not seem t take Nietzsche seriously when it comes to philosophy, he however talked about the Dionysiac philosophy and anew type philosophers, he wanted to have future philosophers who will live and think guided by truth quest so that they could not be finished by Socratic dialectic. He uses it in the Socratic decadence and serenity and calls it the tragic wisdom expressed in demoniac ecstasy and dance,

Nietzsche should be listened to because he makes a new claim and important one he talks about the destiny of human beings and the higher culture possibility of more suitable values for modern science and technology in the world. Again, his ridicule and scorn of Socratic rationalism is similar to that he sued against Christianity which he says is simply the deformed and vulgarized platforms for and of masses,.

Nietzsche and Aristophanes think that Socrates is not in any way an Athenian Achilles, the new old Hellecti virtue hero. He is not a true philosopher as he was for Xenophon and plat, Cicero and Crito and others. On the other hand, the Cloud’s mind satirical mind shows that Socrates appeared to be personifying the destructive and critical Greek pedagogy new sprit. His constant questioning and looking for truth had no limits. Aristophanes wrote this during the disastrous Peloponnesian war general misery. The war saw old traditions disappearing under the pressures of death and diseases. Therefore he tried to show using witty lays effects f the sophistic teaching has on the Athenian youth and morality of the society. Unfortunately and unfairly, it would appear that Aristophanes linked Socrates with a turn that his time pedagogy has embraced making a great satire of the book the clouds though the excessive license use.

However, it should not be forgotten that the real target of Aristophanes was the sophist rhetoric of Gorgias, Protagoras among other sophists who at the time, were active in Athens, it is clear that Socrates courageously opposed the sophists’ ethical relativism and declared skepticism which was determining the custom based morality foundations. Aristophanes as a contemporary play writer radically different from 19th century writer, Nietzsche as Socrates accuser, the merciless attack of Nietzsche on Socrates which occurred more than two millennia seems lees excusable compared to attack of Aristophanes.

Nietzsche greatly uses his proactive writing style, his contradictory way of thinking and his and critical tone against personalities like Socrates. Socrates has been constant target of Nietzsche in his published and unpublished workers.

Nietzsche thought the Socrates demands for intelligibility and meaning in poetry had killed the Greek tragedy ignoring the pre-Socratic cosmological speculations and observations of the sophist anthropologists on moral values and religious beliefs of the Greeks. He focused on Socrates and irrationally put all the blame on Greek tragedy death, he appears to have gone past the audacity of Socrates ancient accusers.

While Nietzsche was a great man who should be celebrated, he should be held accountable for how he non-philosophically treated Socrates. He decided to support sophists and their view of pleasure and power against Socrates and his love for virtue and philosophical wisdom. In the long run, reasonable and physical Socrates overcomes Nietzsche. Reading and understanding that philosophy shows that the love of wisdom as was common in the ancient Hellenes. Such makes it easy for someone to choose between Socrates and Nietzsche. In the end, Socrates wins because quality of higher human values and ethical values that can be expressed as a teacher of virtue and philosopher is great.

Nietzsche is against the Socratic equations of goodness with happiness, knowledge with goodness. He finds this repulsive to aristocratic Hellenes healthy instincts hw lived a risky life as he tried pursuing political power and personal pleasure, choosing between opposing culture as presented by the unrealistic values of platonic philosophers and Socratic values and by naturalistic and relativistic sophists, Nietzsche opted for sophists as they had life enhancing possibilities.

The Socratic verses sophists values related on the metaphysical background of critical opposition between platonic being and Protagoras becoming. Modern science, according to Nietzsche vindicated Protagoras, the faithful follower of Democritus and Heraclitus, and sophist. The doctrine that there exists one world, thus changing and visible word of life and matter of light and darkness of natural necessity and chance were crucial for Nietzsche article on questioning and faith. Therefore, platonic and Socratic alternatives that searches for real world of stability and being of intelligibility and designs of ultimate purpose goals and purpose was seen as unrealistic, instincts and unworthy to people who were already enlightened by contemporary science which vindicated the thought of the pre-Socratic.

Nietzsche thinks that the Socratic doctrine equating virtue with happiness and reason with virtue is a bizarre equation and it has every older Hellenes instinct against it. The Socratic dialectic makes Socrates appear like a traditional Jew instead of ancient Hellenes. Nietzsche finds such distasteful and the use of irony by Socrates that he has interpreted as the resentment of the rabbet expression.

If the working class wants to fight alienation, injustices or mistreatments that employers do, so that justice can be maintained, they need to have their own companies, forcing people so that they can do what is considered right negates the positives being pursued since the person engaging in such actions does not have the needed intend.

Locke would also disagree with Marx theory of labor value, on price values, price should be subjective to an individual who sells and the one who s in the market to by. Subjective pricing has got nothing to do with supply and demand, since it will not matter form a perspective of business if a person agrees to buy it. Same thing can be applied to labor. Incase labor done a person may be done by any other people, the labor vague will decrease and people lack right to interfere with agreement between two people concerning hiring or working. John Locke would sport the system of capitalism that entails the voluntary and peaceful exchange of services and gods between different individuals.