Philosophical+Foundations+of+our+Democracy

=**What are the philosophical foundations of our democracy?**= = =

Some comments: Some great ideas are expressed in the [|Declaration of Independence] like, "all men are created equal . . . endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights."

What are unalienable rights? Unalienable right is a basic human right that cannot be taken away by the government.

There's the phrase, "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. . . . .That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

Where do these noble ideas originate? Why do we even create governments?

Philosophical Foundations Of Our Democracy: Foundations of Natural Rights is a philosophical text by the German philosopher Johann Gottielo Fichte's,it was first published in 1797. The book is one of his broadest books in terms of subjects covered. This book starts off with self-consciousness. Johann believed that self-consciousness needs resistance from outer things. As the book continues,Fichte uses the idea of the "sphere of freedom" to show what he called "original right".

[|consent of the governed]

Consent of the Governed is a political theory stating a governments legitimacy and moral right to use state power, it is derived from the people of society over which that power is exercised.

Does that mean that people make governments to protect life, liberty and happiness?

Does that really mean the power of government comes only from the consent of those governed?

Authority of a government should depend on the consent of the people, as expressed by votes in elections. People are the source of all government power, originally at least.

Although we do not get to boss around Congress, or the president, or the supreme court, we know that the government could not have control if a majority held a general consensus and decided to take action. Take the revolution, for example, and look at how a majority of unhappy citizens made a change to their way of life, because the general consensus was that change was necessary. A government cannot effectively govern a people not willing to put in their two cents to make the wheel turn.

We, as a people, must trust some of our rights and dependencies into the government. Since the government takes material from us, and then tries to turn out a stable situation where we feel comfortable that they are improving the conditions for our basic freedoms of life, liberty, and property, the government could be described as a bank of life. Instead of entrusting our money and property (which to some extent we do in the banking system, and through taxes) we entrust the quality of life we have now, so they can add on and on over time, and always improve our situation. Both Hobbes and Locke believed that a government would be best if the governed people reached some agreement where they could invest certain free aspects of their life into the government, in order to get security and order. They believed that each party had to turn out some product, tangible or intangible, to co-operate together.


 * [|Hobbes]**

Tomas Hobbes is most famous for his political philosophy, how he believed life was everyman for himself, a series of war and anguish where it would be all against all. A life Hobbes would say is hardly worth living, but then Tomas Hobbes goes on to say "The way out of this desperate state is to make a social contract and establish to keep peace and order." Hobbes was both a cynic and an optimist. He could see society's true face, a dog eat dog world, no hope no light, but he also believed in a way to improve on a chaotic world with peace and order however unlikely that improvement is.

[|State of Nature] Put forward by the philosopher Hobbes, the state of nature is an environment in which there would be no laws, government or ruler. For instance, in a State of Nature there wouldn't be rights, but freedoms of the individual. A place in which humans would live off their instincts; laws and governments wouldn't exist, and anarchy would be part of reality. Since the State of Nature is all about "no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions" Then would the three laws of Robotics tie into the State of Nature? They also believe it is imperative that no one should harm another. Are bad habits the products of civilization?

There are many different views on the State of Nature and one that i think we should think about is David Hume's theory. He believes that the State of Nature is just a thought experiment and that we should not take it seriously. What do you think of this? Does justice derives its origin?

[|"state of nature video"]

[|John Locke] An English philosopher who defended the idea that all men are created free and equal in all ways. He argued that everyone had rights, such as the right to life, liberty, and property, that have a set of independent laws of any particular society. Furthermore, he believed that in a natural state, people also had the right to //defend// those rights. To avoid conflicts, people would then create a society and with help from the government, conflicts would be solved in a civil way. Locke also defended the idea that revolting against the government was not only a right, but in some cases, necessary. This idea became one of the fundamentals of the Constitution of the United States and The Declaration of Independence.

[|References to his work]

[|Social Contract]