Krasemann - Blog Post 1
In his explanation of paternal duty from Chapters VI-XI, John Locke undermines the extent of individual freedom. The argument that law is “not so much the limitation as the direction of a free and intelligent agent to his proper interest”, draws into the question the extent to which individual freedom can be taken given both natural and unnatural limitations (Par. 57). The line between duty and freedom becomes blurry with the introduction of paternal power, for a child under the direction of a “ruler from the beginning of infancy”, a father, lacks independence even in their later years, for much of their life is predetermined (Par. 74).
Locke argues that children ought to consent to live submissively but affectionately under their father to achieve political happiness in society (Par. 102, 112). Rather than outright refute Locke’s point of view, I question the extent of truth behind his reasoning. Is initial submission necessary to achieve long term happiness? Does not this submission result in a lack of choice in the future?
I admit that my notion of freedom differs slightly from Lockes’ in the sense of independent decision-making. However, I do find the underlying freedom in a child’s upbringing under Locke’s logic to lack sufficient evidence, for by stripping the child of basic independence for the sake of future political happiness, I believe the child is losing the ability to find happiness through freedom is his or her own right.
Rather than create a free future, a child is “under his father's tuition and authority, till he comes to age of discretion; and then he is a freeman, at liberty what government he will put himself under” (Par. 118). Locke includes so many asterisks in his explanation of freedom that I doubt whether the individual experiences freedom in any sense after childhood.
While I do not argue that children ought to rebel against their parents to achieve complete freedom, I do propose the possibility of loosening the reigns to allow for adolescent decision-making that eventually generates the desired freedom of adulthood.
Comments
On the other hand, Shiffrin will agree with you later in the term that people like Locke underestimate the autonomy and freedom that should be accorded to children.