John Locke Ownership Of Property Analysis
Questions regarding one’s right to ownership of land and property has been an issue much discussed, debated and responsible in creating a stir of conflict in the attempt to find a conclusive answer on subject. In John Locke’s Second Treatise on Civil Government, published in 1690, Locke addresses the matter in question in the fifth chapter titled: ‘Of Property’. In his work, Locke builds an argument that displays how an individual obtains an ownership of property by means of labor. Locke is able to justify his position on the point at issue through the word of God and through simplistic scenarios he illustrates to his reader. Moving forward, in 1874, Chief Seattle conducted a powerful speech to Govenor Isaac Stevens and to the nation, a speech
…show more content…
Nevertheless, readers and scholars alike continue to study these antiquity pieces into the modern age. Despite of their clashing prospects, the two share a commonality in that they both contain entheymatic arguments that which engage the emotions of their audiences to persuade them into believing their appointed arguments. By examining how each writer, Chief Seattle and John Locke structured their works in relation to the appeal of their intended audience, this paper will show how Chief Seattle’s ‘Speech to the U.S President’ proves to be the more effective enthymematic argument rather than John Locke’s ‘Of Property’. This claim will be supported through Aristotle’s definition and favor of the enthymeme as a crucial feature in the study of rhetoric. By means of Aristotle’s of description of the enthymeme and critical analysis of each work, evidence will validate that Chief Seattle’s speech proves to be the most …show more content…
The English philosopher structured his arguments in favor of an individual’s ownership right to property. John Locke describes the world as common property to mankind gifted by God. The substance of Locke’s position caters to the notion that since man is in ownership of himself, he is also in ownership of the fruits of his labor his body applies. Locke describes simplistic and relatable premises to his readers, banking on the notion of a shared premise by rhetor and audience, the sensible progression of his arguments allow the reader to move from point to point. By this description of his work, the presence of the enthymeme appears. Aristotle’s definition of the enthymematic argument revolves around presenting an argument that which is a shared assumption by both the audience and the rhetorician. For example, however, the perfect enthymeme is an argument grasped internally by the audience. John Locke often expresses the assumed without it being necessary. Through his lengthy narration of oversimplified scenarios such as gathering apples but only taking as much as needed, otherwise, they will rot – the audience can already presume if one takes too much of what one needs, the remaining will eventually spoil. Locke goes on and on and frequently repeats the ideas he has already set up for the sole purpose that can bring the audience to agree
Nevertheless, readers and scholars alike continue to study these antiquity pieces into the modern age. Despite of their clashing prospects, the two share a commonality in that they both contain entheymatic arguments that which engage the emotions of their audiences to persuade them into believing their appointed arguments. By examining how each writer, Chief Seattle and John Locke structured their works in relation to the appeal of their intended audience, this paper will show how Chief Seattle’s ‘Speech to the U.S President’ proves to be the more effective enthymematic argument rather than John Locke’s ‘Of Property’. This claim will be supported through Aristotle’s definition and favor of the enthymeme as a crucial feature in the study of rhetoric. By means of Aristotle’s of description of the enthymeme and critical analysis of each work, evidence will validate that Chief Seattle’s speech proves to be the most …show more content…
The English philosopher structured his arguments in favor of an individual’s ownership right to property. John Locke describes the world as common property to mankind gifted by God. The substance of Locke’s position caters to the notion that since man is in ownership of himself, he is also in ownership of the fruits of his labor his body applies. Locke describes simplistic and relatable premises to his readers, banking on the notion of a shared premise by rhetor and audience, the sensible progression of his arguments allow the reader to move from point to point. By this description of his work, the presence of the enthymeme appears. Aristotle’s definition of the enthymematic argument revolves around presenting an argument that which is a shared assumption by both the audience and the rhetorician. For example, however, the perfect enthymeme is an argument grasped internally by the audience. John Locke often expresses the assumed without it being necessary. Through his lengthy narration of oversimplified scenarios such as gathering apples but only taking as much as needed, otherwise, they will rot – the audience can already presume if one takes too much of what one needs, the remaining will eventually spoil. Locke goes on and on and frequently repeats the ideas he has already set up for the sole purpose that can bring the audience to agree