Locke, Science and Politics by Steven Forde

by Steven Forde

In this groundbreaking book, Steven Forde argues that John Locke's devotion to modern science deeply shaped his moral and political philosophy. Beginning with an account of the classical approach to natural and moral philosophy, and of the medieval scholasticism that took these forward into early modernity, Forde explores why the modern scientific project of Francis Bacon, Pierre Gassendi, Robert Boyle and others required the rejection of the classical approach. Locke fully subscribed to this rejection, and took it upon himself to provide a foundation for a compatible morality and politics. Forde shows that Locke's theory of moral 'mixed modes' owes much to Pufendorf, and is tailored to accommodate science. The theory requires a divine legislator, which in turn makes natural law the foundation of morality, rather than individual natural right. Forde shows the ways that Locke's approach modified his individualism, and colored his philosophy of property, politics and education.

Hardcover

First published January 1, 2013

Reviews

[Nathan G. · Rating 4 out of 5]

Probably the best book so far in the literature on Locke's moral philosophy - but that's unfortunately to say more about the literature than this book. The chapters on the contrasts between classical teleology and the new science of Bacon, Boyle and Locke are fascinating and well drawn, as is Forde's use of Pufendorf to shed light on the way Locke grounds morality in Divine law. The "communal" aspect of Locke's philosophy is here taken seriously for the first time, helping to correct decades of horrendous Locke scholarship. Nevertheless, the victory is hollow. For all the focus on Divine law, the transcendent standard Locke points to is not taken sufficiently seriously in the end and we have the obligatory, hollow hints at esotericism. The book ends in considerably more confusion than it needs to thanks to the Straussian method of narrating through a dialectic of contrived obscurities. The book is consequently twice as long as it needs to be.