Take That, Hume*!
Here:
"But Locke failed to fully disclose the transformative nature of his conception of rebellion. Instead, he attempted to make his idea of rebellion appear to be consistent with traditional thought. This manipulative use of language in order to make a new idea appear traditional is Locke's way of concealing from his readers the novelty and ideological nature of his political writings."
And from page 2 of the same article, here is a Voegelin quote on Locke I hadn't encountered:
'Voegelin was indeed quite critical of Locke on those occasions when he wrote about him, labeling Locke among "the most repugnant, dirty, morally corrupt appearances in the history of humanity" because Voegelin saw Locke as "an ideological constructor, who brutally destroys every philosophical problem in order to justify the political status quo."'
I don't think Voegelin liked Locke very much
* I mean my angry commentator, Hume, of course.
"But Locke failed to fully disclose the transformative nature of his conception of rebellion. Instead, he attempted to make his idea of rebellion appear to be consistent with traditional thought. This manipulative use of language in order to make a new idea appear traditional is Locke's way of concealing from his readers the novelty and ideological nature of his political writings."
And from page 2 of the same article, here is a Voegelin quote on Locke I hadn't encountered:
'Voegelin was indeed quite critical of Locke on those occasions when he wrote about him, labeling Locke among "the most repugnant, dirty, morally corrupt appearances in the history of humanity" because Voegelin saw Locke as "an ideological constructor, who brutally destroys every philosophical problem in order to justify the political status quo."'
I don't think Voegelin liked Locke very much
* I mean my angry commentator, Hume, of course.
Comments
Post a Comment