>A state also of equality, wherein all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another; there being nothing more evident, than that creatures of the same species and rank, promiscuously born to all the same advantages of nature, and the use of the same faculties, should also be equal one amongst another without subordination or subjection, unless the lord and master of them all should, by any manifest declaration of his will, set one above another, and confer on him, by an evident and clear appointment, an undoubted right to dominion and sovereignty.In other words: I hold my opponents to impossibly high standards where I will only accept a direct message from God Himself that rules in their favor, but for my argument, I can just say "it is evident," cite Richard Hooker (who also says "it is evident"), and call it a day.How is this allowed?
>>25288485Wait a minute is defending monarchy here? I don’t get it.
>>25288485>How is this allowed?It isn't!
>>25288958No. He's saying that it is evident that in the state of nature there is a state of equality since all humans have the same faculties, contrary to what monarchists like Filmer said. He says that it will literally take divine interference in order for someone to gain sovereignty over others, and this, too, is just obvious according to him. It's a very lazy rhetorical trick you see as a recurrent pattern in philosophical discussions where people will demand that their opponents meet impossibly high standards of truth while allowing themselves to have much weaker standards. This gets more obvious when you realize that Locke isn't even saying there is no inequality of capacity and his natural equality is just grounded in his interpretation of scripture and the brute fact that humans are a single species.
>>25289103I don‘t know about this natural argument thing since nature is really cruel and indifferent, unless one means the divinely inspired calling of conscience on a person‘s mind and soul, which I believe does exist. Insofar as we value something in life, we also value that foundation which makes possible the valuing which is (being a human). I think Eric Voegelin talks about this I plan to read him.
>>25289103Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
