Click here for more. The Android Man's Essay Guide in brief summary with a written example. The essay below has a position that you call a thesis. The thesis had three arguments as outlined in the thesis statement. The three arguments were discussed in the body of the essay in order corresponding with the thesis. There is a conclusion also, You may see this essay as indicative of formal essay structure that was taught in high school in Canada in the 1980's and also at university. The thesis is highlighted and underlined. Have a good day. What follows is not the original essay but its close enough. See if you can see the structure in the essay as matching the thesis. If you can't then try the original essay on Brown Sauce TV maybe tomorrow. Concept of Human Nature according to God and John Locke: an Examination

In writing an essay,  you are writing an argument that confirms your position on a question or issue. For instance, the question could be whether or not you believe in God; yes or no?  The question could be whether or not you believe the USA is a modern industrial nation; yes or no?  If yes, then you would say you believe in God because God is evident  due to argument 1,2, and 3. Then your essay will then fulfil argument 1, 2, and 3 with paragraphs 1, 2, and 3 that you could imagine are like book chapters and then there is a conclusion. Argument 1,2,  and 3 will give evidence from other sources and not just your opinions. Magazine articles are usually essays with evidence if they are scholarly articles and they will quote book sources or other magazine sources. If the article is just an open discussion to help people along their way with strong opinions then the article will point to where people could look for further information on the issue in a general discussion and this is not good enough for university as an essay but the article could be a source for an essay as in Mr. Lyon argues in his Bullets or Bears article dated September 2018 that the North American population is not in need of any other part native population to lead them into the peaceful future with the constitutionally guaranteed mutual tranquillity but that we are obligated to implement programs that bring about a mutual tranquillity using social programs and laws to achieve this constitutional aim  when ever interruptions are caused by technology or when technology demands that we make socio-economic updates that meet with the good intentions of the said technology designed for our betterment. 

The essay below has a  position that you call a thesis. The thesis had three arguments as outlined in the thesis statement. The three arguments were discussed in the body of the essay in order corresponding with the thesis.
There is a conclusion also, You may see this essay as indicative of formal essay structure that was taught in high school in Canada in the 1980's  and also at university.   The thesis is highlighted  and underlined.  Have a good day.   What follows is not the original essay but its close enough.  See if you can see the structure in the essay as matching the thesis. If you can't then try the original essay on Brown Sauce  TV  maybe tomorrow.



Concept of Human Nature according to God and John Locke: an Examination

In  the attempt to define the attributes of man, his needs, and his capacities, the concept of human nature is an intrinsic part of political discussion. Over the centuries, various concepts of human nature have evolved along with the development of political theory. In this discipline, the concept of human nature provides the hub around which a theory revolves. It provides the theory with its basis as well as a presupposition or premise to the political theory's conclusion."i Moreover, a concept of human nature helps us to define the way one sees oneself and the world in which one lives. As well, the concept of human nature in political theory is an essential part of the construction of thought regarding the political environment and the limits of action within that environment. It is through the use of the concept of human nature that we develop our paradigmsii.

Furthermore, by answering the question "what is man's nature?", one can proceed to answer the question "what is required to fulfill the needs of men and to secure a better existence?"iii Politically, this demonstrates the utility of the concept of human nature.

When constructing a concept of man's nature, political theorists provide some moral justification for their postulates. The purpose is to provide the theory with a substance, appealing to the conscience of men. Similar to other theorists, John Locke gives his concept of human nature moral justification by alluding to and making explicit reference to the commands of the Judeo-Christian God. For example, Locke tells us that men are "all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise maker; all the servants of one sovereign God."(p. 9) and are therefore equal. While Locke attributes the source of his theories or concept of human nature to a moral Judeo-Christian God for the purposes of moral justification, it is questionable as to whether or not his theories or concept of human nature is in agreement, partially or completely, with the word of God as outlined in the Bible.  The purpose of this essay is to investigate a God-given concept of human nature while contending that Locke's inferences about the commands of God regarding the state of nature and man's nature within that state are contrary to what is outlined in the bible.  It is contrary in that he ignores some fundamental concepts such as sin, he confuses the man in biblical nature with the  concept of man outside of  nature when he was nasty, brutish and short and he fails to acknowledge that God's nature in man is unchanging.  This essay will deal with each of these points in turn.    In this essay the term "human nature" and "state of nature" are used almost interchangeably.iv

Biblical Outline of the state of Nature

In the book of Genesis, the biblical creation narrative is found. It is here that one must begin the search for a biblical concept of human nature or of man within his original and natural state.

In the first book, God creates man in his own image (Gen. 1:26-27). Because of this, it is necessary to observe some of the attributes of God to obtain some insight into the attributes of man. An example of some Godly attributes are holiness, purity, completeness and magnanimity.  It follows that man was made in the image of these Godly traits. As well, God is spirit and therefore man had a likeness of God's spirit within him. In essence, God is perfect and therefore man, in his original state, was a resemblance of God's perfection. In Psalm 8.5 it says, God made man "...only a little lower than the angels, and placed a crown of glory and honour upon his head." More simply, God is good and man, in his original state, was an image of this goodness(Gen. 1:31 King James version).

God not only created man but also the earth. From the beginning, a special relationship existed between man and nature. In the bible, it tells us that man lived in the garden with all the plants and the animals. Above all creation, man held a special place (Gen. 1:27-28, Psalm 8:6).  He was commanded by God to populate the Earth and to subdue it. Yet "subdue" did not mean to destroy or to control with force but for the offspring of Adam to prevail over the Earth in great numbers. Within nature, God also provided for all of man's needs. God said to man "I have provided all kinds of grains and all kinds of fruit for you to eat;" Gen 1:29 There was no need for man to farm or to work. He stood within nature, moving about God's creation. He was in charge of the animals as authorized by God yet he did not use any means of force to maintain control. Man lived in harmony with the animals as they did not run from man nor did he run from them. God also commanded men to cultivate and to guard the garden of Eden;(Gen.2:15) He was its gardener and was to tend and to care for it.

To explain further;

Man's "dominion," of course, is as God's steward, not as one that is given license to "destroy the earth"(Rev. 11:18). "The Earth is the Lord's, and the fullness thereof; the world, and they that dwell therein"(Ps. 24:1). Nevertheless, although God retains ownership, man has been placed in charge of the Earth and all its systems, living and non-living.v

In his natural state, man was not an irrational being. Unlike the animals, God gave man the capacity to reason and to make choices. As man was made in God's image and God is a rational being, rationality is also a part of man's nature. By the very nature of the command to cultivate and guard the garden, God gave man the ability of mindvi. He would not have given man any commands if man was a mindless ("robotic") being incapable of following or disobeying. Moreover, it is within the garden of Eden, and within his original natural state of being, that man exercises his ability to make choices.

"Come now let us reason together, saith the Lord:,"(Isaiah 1:18)

After God made all of the animals, He brought them to Adam to see what he would name them. God Honoured Adam's choices as the names of the animals remained unchanged. Adam also named Eve, calling her a woman. Afterwards, he explained the reason for the name, saying "woman is her name because she was taken out of man."(Gen.2:23)

Later, Genesis 3: 2,3 depicts man's choice to eat of the fruit of knowledge of Good and Evil. Verse 6, Chapter 3(living Bible) says that Eve was "convinced" to eat of the fruit. The word "convinced" indicates that Eve had reached a conclusion through her faculty of reason. Although she knew that she was not to eat of the fruit, she was tempted with the choice of doing so. Verse 6 goes on to say that Eve saw how lonely and fresh the fruit was and that she believed the devil's promise that it would make her wise. Gen 3:13 depicts God's confrontation with Eve over the act of disobedience. The Lord said "How could you do such a thing?"

"The serpent tricked me" she replied. More simply, the serpent tricked her sense of reason through temptation and as a result, while exercising her ability to make choices, Eve ended up making the wrong choice ultimately.  As Adam and Eve ate of the fruit, man committed the first sin. Defined as a transgression of the command or will of God, It follows that sin is doing something which is contrary to God's nature. As man was made within the nature of God and was an expression of his goodness, the act of disobedience resulted in Man being cursed to stand outside of God's nature.

While God had provided for all of Man's needs within the garden, (the fruit of the trees, the natural grains, the water of the river), man was forced to provide for his own needs outside of it (Gen.3:23).  God cursed the earth so that man would have to struggle to extract a living from it with sweat and toil until his dying days (Gen.3:17-19).  Before this, man did not die. Death was contrary to God's intentions. In the book of the Wisdom of Solomon, it tells us that God did not invent death; that when living creatures die, it gives him no pleasure. It says that he created everything so that it might continue to exist. (Wis.1:12-14)

Soon after, the affects of sin became apparent. Cain killed his brother Abel out of envy. Before Adam's disobedience, there were no sentiments of this sort within the world. The first act of disobedience resulted in the rupture of fellowship and harmony with God, nature, and man. All of this was diametrically opposed to God's will and intentions. Nevertheless, this is not to say that reason and making choices is sinful but that man made the wrong choice due to the utilization of twisted reason; twisted by the Serpent's tempting. The result was that man's, once obedient, Godly, good, nature had changed becoming disobedient, ungodly, and carnal. He had lost his original nature, acquiring a sinful nature. He was no longer empowered by God's spirit but was fleshly.

As time passed, God provided man with the ten commandments which, if followed, would prevent men from hurting one another. Primarily, the three main points of emphases behind the commands were to love God, love your neighbour as you love yourself and to do unto others as you would have them do unto you (John 13:34, Luke 6: 30). As love with and for ones fellow man was lost through sin, the commandments were a guide for men to follow throughout life.

In overview, man's original nature or state of nature was Godly, pleasing to his creator, and was considered good.  All of creation was under his charge as he fulfilled his role as a steward.  He was commanded to prevail over the earth by being fruitful and multiplying. He was also to care for it and not to destroy it. He shared the garden with the animals and with Eve(his mate) and provided all with their names. Moreover, man was at peace with God and stood rightly before him, unified and harmonious with the creator and creation.  As well, God gave man mind, providing man with the ability to reason and to make choices; both wrong and right apparently. He had made man sufficient to stand yet free to fall.

Upon making a wrong choice, man acted contrary to his God-given nature which was to maintain relationship and connection to God and was forced to leave the garden. Forever more, man's nature was altered, becoming sinful. Therefore man, in a state of nature, given by God, is not his present nature. His true nature is the one which he possessed before he disobeyed God's command. The result of Adam's disobedience was the acquisition of the knowledge of good and evil. At this point, man stood outside of the garden, outside of nature, and was unnatural. All enmity, evil, and strife entered the world resulting in discord with God, the rest of creation and fellow man. This prompted God to provide man with the Ten commandments so they may live a life in accordance with His will. In Ecclesiastes 7:39 it is written, "God made us plain and simple, but we have made ourselves very complicated."

Locke's concept of nature  is contrary to the word of God in that he ignores some fundamental concepts such as sin

John Locke provides us with a different picture of what man was like in a state of nature given to men by God. In this state, Locke speaks of men having possessions. He tells us that the earth had been given to mankind in common.(p. 18) To support this, he makes reference to Psalm 115:16 which says "The Heavens even the heavens are the Lord's: but the earth hath he given to the children of men." Yet, he endeavours to demonstrate how men came to own property out of what was in common. He argues that every man has property within himself and the labour of his body. Therefore, if man mixed his labour with anything that was left in the common state, it became the product of his work, making it his property. It is labour which makes the distinction between what is in common and what is in private. No consent of any other man was necessary. It was a right given to men by God. At the same time, there were limits to how much a man could appropriate for his own use. He could not appropriate more than he could use. God did not allow men to spoil or destroy.(p. 20)

Further in his argument, he infers that God gave the world to men for their greater benefit and did not intend for the world to remain in common and uncultivated. As a result, Locke argues that it was given primarily to the " industrious and rational...not to the fancy or covetousness of the quarrelsome and contentious" who would leave it to waste.

Moreover he contends that God's commandment to subdue the earth instructed man to "improve it for the benefit of life."(p. 21) To do this, Locke argued man was required to labour. Adding to this further, he writes that God commanded, and (man's) wants forced him to labour; that was his property which could not be taken from him wherever he had fixed it.(p.22)

From this, he concluded that subduing, cultivating, and having dominion over the earth were one and the same, and that God's commandment to subdue authorized man to appropriate property. Through these arguments, Locke justified the acquisition of property within the state of nature.

It was in this natural state that men enjoyed perfect freedom, ordered their actions, disposed of their possessions and persons, as they thought fit within the bounds of the law of nature.(p.xiii) This law of Nature is defined as "that which forbids anyone harming another or destroying himself, and requires each to try when his own preservation comes not in competition" to preserve the rest of mankind."(p.xiii) Further, he says that all of mankind was under the obligation of this law and that it was synonymous to reason. Within this state of nature governed by natural law, there existed liberty, equality, and independence. Yet, Locke also tells us that there would be those who would transgress the law of nature, declaring themselves "to live by another rule than that of reason and common equity, which is that measure God has set to the actions of men, for their mutual security." Such transgressions would result in the state of nature regressing into a state of war. Yet, it was within the state of nature that all of this occurred.

Having looked at the concept of human nature according to the word of God and the one proposed by Locke where an effort was made by Locke to justify his theory with biblical references, it is clear that the two concepts disagree. The first area of discrepancy is the way in which the state of nature is defined. Locke defines it as the state in which men live together according to reason, "...without a common superior on earth, with authority to judge between them."(p. 15) Differing from this, a biblical definition would assert that the state of nature is one in which men lived in obeyance to the will of God. In other words, it was a state void of sin. In all of Locke's theory there is no mention of the original sin. In many cases, Locke makes reference to Adam but apparently ignores the event. As a result, he ignores the fact that Adam's nature had changed from its original Godly state into a sinful one. Because of this, Locke interprets the commands which God gave to Adam incorrectly. As outlined earlier, the command to "subdue" the earth is found in the same verse where God commands Adam to fill the earth with his progeny.(Gen. 1:7) Therefore, when read in context "subdue" did not mean to labour and to acquire property but to dominate the earth in great numbers. Moreover, God explicitly tells Adam that all of his needs are provided for within the garden.(Gen.1:29) Work was not necessary. Because of this, it is apparent that the command to cultivate the garden was not a command to labour for one's needs or for possessions but to "dress and to keep" the garden as would a gardener(Gen.2:15).

Locke confuses the man in biblical nature with the  concept of man outside of  nature when he was nasty, brutish and short

As a result, it is evident that Locke interprets these commands with out making reference to man's original state, God and man's relationship with man, and God's provisions for mankind. In fact, Locke's theory on the state of nature is more congruent with what the bible tells us about man in his sin nature.

Labour was a part of man's curse. As well, there was no concept of property before sin. A man would only say "mine" when he was in fear or concern of someone taking away what was in his possession (By possession, I do not mean something that one owned but something that one had taken up to provide for his needs; for example, a seed or an apple to eat. Man had no consciousness or knowledge of the concept "mine" because there was no threat of someone taking the seed or the apple away). In man's obedient nature, there was no sin, therefore there was no fear of being attacked or robbed by an adversary. It was only when sin entered the world that the fear of being attacked or murdered became a reality. Such acts occurred in Locke's concept of the state of nature yet according to the biblical text such acts could have only occurred when man was outside of his nature state and within his unnatural sin nature.

To Locke, this state was governed by the law of reason. Apparently, he assumes that reason was always right and that man had to simply live by the reasoning of his mind. When man transgressed the rights of another, Locke argued that they were living contrary to reason and deserved to be punished. This is not defined as sin but as a transgression of the law of reason which God gave to all men. This transgression was committed not against God but against another man. Therefore it was not God who punished but man. He says that God gave man the right to punish but nevertheless God is still somewhat removed from the picture. While Locke tells us that reason and common equity were given to men for their mutual security, the bible shows us that God gave man the Ten commandments. Although reason is God given ability, it was not always right. Reason could be tricked or could lead one to do the wrong thing. As a result, it would be beneficial for men to trust God again and to live by the commandments of God than the dictates of man's fallible reason.

From our analysis of Locke's theories and his attempt to justify his postulates morally with the word of God, it is apparent that Locke had no intention of agreeing with God's word and simply used it to provide a cloak of righteousness around his worldly, self-serving arguments.

As it was mentioned earlier in this paper, one of the key purposes of the concept of human nature or of man within his natural state is to answer the question "what is man's nature?" so that one can proceed to answer the question " what is required to fulfill the needs of men?"

As Locke tells us that man in a state of nature lived by right reason and sought to provide for his own needs as well as the needs of others, man was thereby moral. Yet, in his essay on Human Understanding, Locke says that man was also motivated by his appetites which were mainly a desire for happiness and an aversion to misery (Book 1, ch.3, sect. 3). Due to their pervasiveness, these appetites would lead men to contradict the law of reason and lead him into a state of war with others. Because of this, men were constantly exposed to the potentiality of invasion of their property and persons by others, leaving them unsafe, insecure, and anxious for his life.(p. 16, P. 65) Based on this concept of Human Nature, Locke concluded that the answer to man's needs for safety and security would be to step out of the state of nature and into society or government where man's appetites could be checked by the necessary rewards, punishments, minimum rules of morality, and positive laws.

Locke fails to acknowledge that God's nature in man is unchanging.

In great contrast to this, the word of God tells us that man in his natural state was Godly, free from sin, in harmony with hiuuuuus creator and with creation, secure, in no need of labour or property, God dependent, and free from all fears. Having lost this through disobedience, he stepped out of his natural state, was forced to labour, fell out of harmonious fellowship with the creator and creation, acquired the capacity to hate, envy, and murder relentlessly (stepping into a Lockeian concept of the state of nature). Since the Ten Commandments provided only a temporary solution to the problem, based on the biblical concept of man's essential Godly nature, what men required to fulfill their needs was the reconciliation of their relationship with God. God eventually provided for this reconciliation through Jesus Christ.

Exemplifying this through his words, Christ called men to come unto Him so that he couldgive them rest, that in Him, they would find rest for their souls, while receiving only thelight burdens of Christ (ie. Obedience to God, Matt 11:28).  Man, in his natural state, was notrequired to labour but only to depend upon God. Therefore, it is appropriate that Christ offered rest in return for obedience. As well, he also taught that...whosoever will save his own life shall lose it and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.

For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world and lose his own soul (Matt. 16:25,26).

In this verse, it demonstrates that man's needs would not be met by his attempt to satisfy his own needs independent of God but that losing oneself to Him by placing all of one's life in his hands was the answer to man's ultimate needs. Answering the need for the restoration of harmony between men and God, Jesus gave men the greatest commandment;

Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy Heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself; (that within) these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets (Matt 22:37-40).

Therefore God Himself, through Christ, was the answer to the needs of men as dictated by man's nature in his natural state according to the word of God.

In conclusion, Politics is not relegated to the stratosphere of society. It is a grassroots phenomenon involving and affecting people and the results of all political activity will be reflected in the lives of the citizenry. This activity could involve the  influence of Monarchs in their good wisdom and fortunate  position to see what will reflect positively in safe and secure people at any technological juncture that all nations have encountered with robotic labour and the need for UBI in addressing man in his on-going heavenly nature that demands a dignity befitting of a creator or at least of  a human being whether or not you believe in creation.  Man can create technology and provide the solutions that will honor men and God himself who bestows insight  in the creation of this good and reliable mechanical labour.    The purpose of this essay was not to argue for the existence of God but to suppose that He existed while investigating what the bible had to say about man in a state of nature. That being said, Hebrews 11:6 is evident in that it says he who comes to God must believe that God is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him.  The intention of this essay, therefore, was to demonstrate that Locke's conception of man in a state of nature was contrary to what is outlined in the creation narrative in Genesis and to the rest of scripture. Having investigated this, it results that even though Locke uses the word of God in his arguments, he uses it incorrectly so that in the final analysis, Locke's theory conflicts greatly with the word of and the intentions of God. Because of this, the two concepts (that of God's word and Locke's) provide different answers to the needs of men as defined by the respective concepts of the state of nature. Locke proposes man-made government while the word of God proposes God's government manifested in the kingdom of Heaven through Jesus Christ: Therefore take no thought, saying what shall we eat? or what shall we drink? or, wherewithal shall we be clothed?... But seek ye first the Kingdom of God, and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you (Matt.6: 31,33, Ecclesiastes 5).

It is unfortunate for Locke, but man's reason is not perfect. It is fallible. Locke does not seem to acknowledge this. Hence, many of our world systems are inherently set on a crash course for collapse and have come to threaten man's very existence. It only took three hundred years from the time of Locke's first publishing where we must ask ourselves, how have we come to the brink of man's existence in terms of environmental failure or nuclear holocaust so rationally or is it irrationally? Our reason must be God dependent; not independent of God or presumptively right because it is called reason nor should it be worshiped as such. 

Over very powerlessness and the fragility of our egos leads us to seek power in this brief life and to seek control; sometimes at the cost of selling and pledging our very souls ( Salome's mother (Mark 6:14-29), Hitler)).  But, God is power. God is in control.  Our current reality is the proof of the error of our trajectory; the error of our calculation, the error of our Lockeian philosophy. A third treatise is needed which will not be so short sighted and driven by continual taking, destruction (1st Timothy) and the fear of not having enough; the profit driven, property and provision, and continual expansion paradigm. How many cars can we sell in China?  Our capacity to realise a new energy paradigm based on hydrogen engines and fuel is realisable in this generation, freeing us from the doubt and global insecurity engendered by the dependence on fossil fuels (see link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ykl2PH2B-tM&p=448B4793713D9028&playnext=1&index=23). 

Anything short of realising the hydrogen paradigm (five loaves and two fish) in the next 10 months is a failure of our collective genius (see link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RcsRk_gtO2U&feature=related).  Imagine the cost of airline seats with jets equipped and flying with hydrogen jet engines (see link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N675mHss_uQ ).  A war with my ego may cost trillions of dollars but hydorgen is...virtually free.  We are now spending critical resources and energy to consider the threat of rising water levels to global security and there were many individuals who refused to accept the scientific reality of global warming because it was decided by certain "say so's(2+2=5?)" that it did not fit their political ideology but they do not live in Greenland or in the south pacific where the loss of polar ice caps and land mass respectively is a living reality. Our current format is impossibly unsustainable lest we subdivide the moon and the last remaining rain forests ( see a Fate Worse Than debt by Susan George: http://www.amazon.ca/Fate-Worse-Than-Debt/dp/0802131212).  What is needed is a third treatise which will hold in view the long term existence of all of mankind.   When it comes to the multi-complexioned capability of human history, we can look to the past and the evidence of Egypt  as we remember the average, very brown complexion of the average human being in America before 1420 and before any meetings with maybe more pale part or fully native Europeans.  As such, we look forward to the multi-complexioned and capable future of an America that is freed from the complexioned coil of ignorance and division that is not tolerated in the efficacious and free educational system that binds us together in the tutelage of the American creed and founding documents where we hold these truths to be self-evident; that all men are created equal but they may not all be able to manifest this truth in their emotions just yet as the unforgiving but politically enabled victims of various men who came to America as victims who chose to do unto others as was done unto them by the Romans As such, 'stop a graduate from enjoying his constitutional freedoms in the Bill of Rights or the Charter of Rights and Freedoms is not how you define political legitimacy but illegitimacy and what politician would wish to bank on such a notion as covering all of their misfeasance in public office?  Could it say that the North American Anglo population is dangerously under funded and under educated such that democratic 'first the past the post' electoral systems are incapable of functioning and that the only solution would be an authoritative one party system of  government in an authoritative capitalism that ensures mutual tranquillity with the intention to put in place a Safe Secure People Act with UBI, an infrastructure modernization and Works program and a new Education Act that ensures school is mandatory up to the age of 18 years  of age!   Most  of the Romans who were asked to settle in Briton by the Romans were trouble as those who ere banished and sentenced under Roman law. Britannia was a penal colony.  This does not aid the fact that Britannia was one of the last settlements in the Roman empire; not the earliest and Britannia is therefore a late arrival in the received culture and history of the known world.  But, although late in Rome, they are still earlier in  the expanse of  the known history  of the world than any Western hemispheric native peoples and  they are quite capable of reciting and regurgitating the answer to civilization  as seen in the ten commandments and the magna carta as developed on the principles seen in the ten commandments.   If there is any absolute authority any where, it is seen in the oaths taken to defend constitutions and systems that ensure the mutual tranquilities of our global communities.  A constitutional monarch may be a part of this but if such a monarch has any value in the system it will be seen in the quality of life that their influence on the system will entail such that the quality of life of such peoples under the system of Westminster Parliamentary democracy will be on par with the well being of all other citizens with equal or superior consuming power, mobility, mortality rates and UBI/basic income. There are constitutional monarchs all over the world. The English monarchy is not the only one but the English  speaking people seem to be the only people in the modern industrial world without basic income on mass while they endeavour, year after year to figure out if you are still English once the movie projector is turned on if you don't look the English man on the movie screen and this is the problem we are facing with automation and basic income. Has the movie screen told us we are deserving of it and that we are still all one people  regardless of complexion just as history and the founding documents indicate? Well, we would have to be since the movie screen says that we are. Have you seen Die Hard(the movie)? What about Bourne Identity(the movie)?  What about the movie Armageddon? What about the movie entitled  'Guess who's coming to dinner?' It is just that family is the final denominator in the economic equation of capitalism and the family unit; not the honor that an individual may imagine he will achieve above his 4 time graduate son or daughter if he puts the compostable garbage in the right bin on every occasion with his Bitten apple phone at his side while he  fails to honor family and propagate family and hopes for a pat on his nose from nomadic people from Belize who portend to be Muslims and who want him to betray his Anglo West Indian children's  creativity while he hopes as a father pathetically to inherit his son's law firm from his son and give his children eulogies with the fraudulent notion that he graduated from a BA (business program from a North American university or from any M.ED program. Did you know your son took a GED in England to confirm his understanding of the English educational system? Did you know he took a GED in the year 2004 just to see how the educational system has changed?  He is humble!   But, as the politically and under educated and under prepared victims given all of the authority in politics, they can solve of their problems and respect the creed of E Pluribus Unum and make all Americans regardless of complexion  beneficially equal with social policies honoured by every major industrial community and country in the world except for America at this time.   Charlemagne looked like Cheddar man and had the same complexion. His message was for all Picts who had not yet met Rome to eat the food and wear the clothing but you could not be independent in that you have no separate nation but you could have a sub nation within the greater nation and a reserve and the laws are the same in the reserve as they are in the umbrella nation. The only issue is that the magna carta in Britannia is a received culture as it is a received culture in North America along with every aspect of the American rendition of a civil society as expounded upon in the American founding documents with the only intention being a mutual tranquillity. The issue with this history in North America is that what happened in 1787 legally did not transpire immediately across the entire continent that may not have met this magna carta yet and the founding documents based upon its principles and tenets and the resultant history after 1776 in spite of every declaration at Independence has been two fold; one is dependence is on going to understand how to update the system geared towards MUTUAL TRANQUILITY AND THE KEY IS  THAT JOHN LOCKE INTENDED FOR LIFE LIBERTY HEALTH AND PROPERTY; NOT LIFE, LIBERTY AND A LOOSELY IDEALISED AND INDIVIDUALISTIC PURUIST OF HAPPINESS as worded by Thomas Jefferson but the concept of Life, Liberty etc originates with Locke. But, too often the pursuit of happiness IS NOT UNDERSTOOD FIRST AS A COMMUNAL COMMITMENT TO A MUTAL PURSUIT OF HAPPINESS AND MUTUAL TRANQUILITY  FIRST  AND THEN YOU CAN HAVE YOUR DREAM about your pursuits under the umbrella of a mutual tranquillity and security as set out in the constitutional preamble.  BUT THE  INDIVIDUAL DREAM CANNOT THREATEN WHAT WE HOLD MUTUALLY AS SELF EVIDENT ANO NOR  CAN IT THREATEN THE NON-RACIALISED AND GURANTEED MUTUAL TRANQUILITY!;    The preamble to the American Constitution says: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.  

  This preamble would mean that when technological cross roads transpire, the goal of feeling  childishly  independent (an childish, immature emotional independence) does not mean  there is benefit in denying logic that aids true independence and self sufficiency in an interdependent world  instead of financial dependency in a  surficial appreciation of one's culture and identity where you need the pound currency  to feel English for instance. as if Brown sauce and fish and chips with Ribena  and a Range Rover is not enough.   This is so even if the logic arises secretly in a Honda Customer service manual.    You received a culture quite late in the history of the world such that when Rome was enjoying a flush toilet or Roman Bath  what were you doing in Montana in 500 BC?   You are in the position to receive a culture  and also socio-economic and technological  solutions therein and you do contribute  as to how to update the system of mutual tranquillity to achieve that mutual goal and purpose when change demands it  in technology with the updated  role of the human being  such that we see his true economic purpose as   a consumer first vs. labourer and this would have been the case once mass markets, mass farming  and mass industrial production for food and goods  began in the late 1800's.    The two World wars were also predicated on a continent wide demand if not a global demand to ensure a systemic competency, compatibility or  sameness across the vast continent of Europe primarily and then the world for the smooth and commodious distribution and sale of industrially produced goods. The war takes place when there is resistance. This is the second point after 1776; resistance. The human being in America is resisting but may not realise it. He desires a lifestyle but is resisting the solutions as proven and tested in  the major centres of civilization that bestowed upon Britannia first and secondly  North America and the Western Hemisphere  the magna carta as written in Europe; not in Britannia. It was written by the French. The truth is that much of America has received the final solution and final answer in the magna carta but they are actively resisting not only the final answer but the systemic updates with new socio-economic formulations and technological delivery or manifestations of the domestic, mutual tranquillity as seen in UBI or a F bitten apple king   fuel cell ice train without any electric  wires over head But, the absence of UBI on mass and the number of diesel trains is evidence of a resistance by indigenous people regardless of complexion but who are usually beige evidently these days *and the scarecrow in the Wizard of Oz confirms that people with no brains can talk a whole lot evidently)  who portend to be white minded as in Ikea feeling' but who resist the efficiency that IKEA represents in the domestic tranquillity insured for us all whether  manifested in the purchase of IKEA or not but you will have enough to buy what you want and to enjoy. This means that Locke afforded us a good formation of the system of government we require and its purpose. The Justification of slave labour is really the history of civilization justifying its subjugation of outsiders or new comers who are certainly human or else they would not have been indoctrinated in a servile role. Joseph and his brothers saw this pattern in Egypt personally as a family adopted by Pharaoh with Joseph once a slave himself.  But, the American rendition of Locke's system did not mention health and property and the system including  the Magna Carta  has met with resistance in either case but the dream and the pursuit of happiness is ill defined and requires continual remembrance of the umbrella purpose defined as  domestic tranquillity that is insured and for which we will kill above all else in defending this tranquillity so leave Navy Crew(TM), Angel Ronan(TM) and  Londinium(TM) and your neighbour's  sumting   alone such as the law firm file boxes (as stolen although you would want to hope he sues in civil court but you are in jail since theft is theft and the police are involved due to your misfeasance in public office. How much do you have to give them to avoid jail maybe? Try to bribe them? ) and give him his money Mr. Asunder at de Shipping service  or else you nah remember that is one people out of many you nuh see? .   But, this resistance appears in many guises and all it takes is the suggestion of permissiveness in a 'Nazi phone or a Bitten Apple phone and then all hell breaks loose if not pre-empted by those who are watching closely for signs of insufficient humanity among the citizenry and too much desperation in the absence of the requisite and received solutions from the more tranquil, older and more settled and  civilised parts of the world.   Any governor who does not wish to respect the limits on his power is a criminal and should not be tolerated although he claims the right to kill any university graduate who ever set foot on UK soil while  actually being the product of a North American High school.    Who could that governor or premier be? Could he really set his mandate on killing a graduate to please a lawless political resistant base of voters who  he is actually killing ,one by one,  who are  set on fighting our guaranteed and mutual  tranquillity? The point is every European is part native and some are Afrique in appearance even before Louis the 1st or Charlemagne when there was no concept of race to divide men  and they have resolved to allow themselves to enjoy life with a basic minimum financial guarantee for all and maybe you will buy real property or maybe you will just live in hotels and travel after high school.  But, the requisite mutual security and tranquillity is guaranteed for all Europeans just like it is guaranteed for all Asians in China and Japan and Korea and regardless of complexion.   So we will be clear that in any America, beige  complexion is not enough to get an airline job or a paramedic qualification or to call upon yourself to be a servant of the court. It will take preparation for any such life expectation but maybe any complexion will be good enough to eat and sleep in your own dwelling just as it is enough in Asia or Europe with basic income as we accept that the role of industrial work  is really for machines but economic participation as consumers  is reserved  primarily for the valued and celebrated  human being regardless of complexion.   The pursuit of happiness misunderstood takes  us out of the communal endeavours of mutual security and tranquillity, ending in  a individual competition of dreams and intentions that leads us to Hobbes' fear of life being nasty, brutish and short.  This is anathema to our constitution that speaks of a common people in a common endeavour for the people and by the people or for the mutual  peace, order and good government.   If your neighbour has a hemi or V8 engine, that should be no threat to you and your childish ego. A 2002 A4 should be no threat to your ego.  But, with the social contract we approach civil society and humane government.  If Locke had been honest in faith, he might have provided a theory for a system that would last not only three to four hundred years but that would have been truly inspired by the word of God and God's call to have dominion; dominion as in care for and sustain while also living from the earth.  We can only leave behind what we have hoarded,once we have died.  The Chinese and the Japanese and the Europeans as seen in the German endeavours during WW1 and WW2 have worked on a model of peace and dominion with a sufficient minimum provision for all of their citizens regardless of complexion since what is complexion when there is a common truth and culture binding the community together and there will always be differences among men as there are differences among fish and frogs who just  Fbitten applek  and procreate lovingly in God's wisdom when appropriate and some do form family bonds.  Men should and they have no other wisdom.

 The answer here is to see the American founding documents as the final bond in a country founded by people who watched Anthony Johnson( see the case of  Johnson vs. Parker concerning a Mr. Cassor)   https://www.encyclopediavirginia.org/Court_Ruling_on_Anthony_Johnson_and_His_Servant_1655

and other Brown men as they owned beige(formerly white) and brown slaves before and after the constitution was passed in a non-racialised political and economic truth enshrining non-racialised human value with great cost  and great benefit  for all citizens.    See also Somerset vs. Stewart 1773.https://bradford.ac.uk/law/media/law/allfiles/student-law-journal/Abigail-Sisnett---The-pivotal-role-Britain-played-in-the-Atlantic-slave-trade.pdf    This non-racialised human value must be enshrined today in the post civil war industrialized, continually automated and mechanized  world with basic income for every citizen and after we understand the concept, you can call it the safe, secure people insurance income if you like. 

We should seek to give  'life' and not just inanimate wealth to our own future generations; to our own children's children; to the Smiths, the Jones', the Mbakas, the Chus, the Greenspoons, the Denilsons, the Costas, the Tochukwus, the Pedersons, Zegatas, Grahams, ten Booms and you can add your family's last name to the list. For those who can do something about it, this will be the greatest gift that they can leave to their family's future generations. Everyone can do something about it. We must think beyond what happens when we die. Our deeper theory determines our practice.  There is a book written that discusses the philosophy behind the 'Terminator' movies but ultimately we are the philosophy. It is dark. It needs to change. Hopefully we will not lose sight of our God-given capacity to reason and also the need to trust in God in the effort to find a solution; a solution other than holocaust.  We revere and rely on Christ's intuition absolutely (Proverbs 3:5,6).

So let it be.

Concept of Human Nature according to God

and John Locke: an Examination

Warren Lyon

Politics 237, University of Western, Ontario

First written: March 1993

Edited: February 2018

Copyright: February 9th, 2018

Warren Augustine Lyon, English Lawyer, , B.A(Hons), LL.B(Hons), LL.M(LPC), Litigator, Legal Analyst with Angel Ronan, Greenfield Urban Law Firm. www.angelronangreenfieldurban.blogspot.ca.  www.angelronan.wixsite.com/arcconsulting 

Toronto, Canada

Bibliography

1. Berry, C.J, Human Nature, Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, Humanities press International: 1986

2. Locke, John., Second Treatise Of Government, Indianapolis, Hackett Publishing: 1980.

3. Morris,H.M., The Biblical Basis of Modern Science Grand Rapids, Baker Book House: 1984.

4. The Bible: King James version, Living Bible Translation, Good News Bible.

Endnotes

iChristopher J. Berry, Human Nature (Atlantic Highlands, New Jersey, 1986) p.133

iiParadigm is defined as a self-actualizing world view; Robert Melvin, Professor in Politics at the University of Western, Ontario.

iiiibid. as in #1. p. xiii

iv The reason for this is that man's nature in the state of nature is, in essence, the same as human nature. The purpose of the concept of human nature is to look at man in his most natural state and this would most likely be found within the state of nature.

vHenry M. Morris, The Biblical Basis of Modern Science(Grand Rapids, Michigan, Baker Book House, 1984), p. 41

viMind is defined as "that with which the living being feels, wills, and thinks; Intellectual ability, and the capacity to reason.,The New American Webster Dictionary

Our capacity to realise a new energy paradigm based on hydrogen engines and fuel is realisable in this generation, freeing us from the doubt and global insecurity engendered by the dependence on fossil fuels-our collective genius realised.