John Locke’s Views on ‘Liberty’

5 min readMar 15, 2023

An overview of Locke’s conception of liberty and his political philosophy

Introduction to John Locke

John Locke (1632–1704) was one of the most influential philosophers of the 17th century Enlightenment period. He is known as the father of classical liberalism. He was one of the three classic British empiricists (the other two being George Berkeley and David Hume).

Locke’s main contributions were to the fields of epistemology and political philosophy. He is believed to have been deeply influenced by Marcus Tullius Cicero (Roman philosopher, statesman and lawyer born in 106 BC) . He influenced thinkers like Voltaire and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

His works can be understood to revolve around three issues — 1) Education of youth, 2) Qualifications and powers of rulers and 3) Religious toleration. Some of his major works are Two Treatises of Government(1689), An Essay Concerning Human Understanding(1689) and A Letter Concerning Toleration(1689).

[Interestingly, Locke denied authorship of the Two Treatises because of a fear of persecution]

Locke had a deep influence on politics which can be observed till this day. Our modern day democracy is, in many ways, Lockean, with ideas of rule of law, religious toleration, views of science and progress, pragmatism and equal rights to life, liberty, property and work.

Overview of Locke’s Ideas

Locke believed that humans are naturally born into a state of perfect freedom. Humans are free to act in whatever way they want, as long as they are not violating the ‘laws of nature’.

‘Law of nature’ can be understood as the law as per which one can act freely, as long as such an act does not restrict another’s right to do the same. In case there is a violation of this law, there is also consequent retribution in varied forms. In other words, for adhering to this law, one should not, in any way, harm another person.

Laws and regulations are framed and enforced for the protection of natural rights. Logical and ethical reasoning goes into their formulation. Every law and regulation is either an order/advisory to do something or to not do something. It is by their very virtue, hence, that they restrict the freedom to choose.

So, when an individual joins a community, they consent to forfeit at least a part of their freedom. Locke believed that if a ruler becomes tyrannical or autocratic, then the community has the power to choose a different ruler, or to opt out of that community. Critics of Locke argue that this is at best theoretical and cannot be practiced in reality. An example of this can be how North Koreans do not have the option/freedom/choice to migrate to South Korea or any other country.

Locke’s Conception of Liberty

Locke viewed liberty as being a choice in a moral framework, having the laws of nature and the principle of equality at its foundation. Liberty is, therefore, the freedom to do what is permitted by the law of nature. In other words, every person is free to do what they desire, given that they do so while respecting the principle of equality. Liberty should not come at the cost of equality.

The universality of liberty

Liberty, being a natural right, is universal in nature, argued Locke. He believed that the right to liberty is an inalienable one as it is bestowed upon humans by nature. It is universally perceived by reason by virtue of being an innate part of human nature.

Freedom is bestowed upon everyone as it is a law of nature, not unlike the rights to life and property. One of his notable claims is that of humans earning ownership over resources when they contribute/invest labor in that particular resource (principle of self-ownership).

Liberty and Government

For Locke, the natural right of liberty precedes political and civil society. The purpose that a civil society contract aims to serve is the preservation of natural rights. An important point that Locke emphasized upon is the role of the state only as a regulator, and not restrictor of natural rights.

He believed that the necessity of government arises from the problems that humans would have otherwise faced in an ‘ideal’ anarchic state. A civil society provides protection that would have been missing in an anarchy.

Toleration and Freedom

Locke was opposed to the religious dogmatism prevalent in Europe and strongly believed in the cogency of religious tolerance in reducing violence. He was a strong supporter of the right to freedom of conscience and religion.

His firm dislike for hereditary monarchy is clear in his writings. He did not agree with Thomas Hobbes’ ‘Divine Rights of Kings’. He also subtly opposed patriarchy by pointing out its flaws on moral grounds.

Locke believed that an ideal individual is equipped with reason (for actions) and freedom (of being heard).

Oversight of Locke’s Theory

Locke does not provide any practical ways of bringing about this theoretically sensible moral framework. What exactly would go into the making of a state that regulates the freedom of choice while ensuring absence of restraint?

Also, Locke’s philosophy seems to be focusing on the practice of liberty at an individual level. He appears to have overlooked the obstacles to liberty that arise within a moral framework when it is being practiced.

Whatever Locke’s theories lacked, his successors attempted to address. Some of the notable ones are — Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill.

Endnote and Thoughts

John Locke was perhaps the first notable philosopher to build a complete system around the principle of liberty. He played a dominant role in rejecting the widely prevalent belief in the theory of divine rights of Kings and his claim that every human being is equally endowed with the natural rights of life, liberty and property had a lasting impact on the formation of laws in a state.

Locke’s progressive views about society and religious toleration appealed to me. As someone who did not find Thomas Hobbes’ Theory of Divine Rights convincing at all, Locke’s reason-based and pro-equality and freedom theory seemed to paint a much better picture of an ideal civil society.