Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that Locke's own proviso requires 'enough and as good' left for others, a condition demonstrably unmet in any historically actual property regime.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
Locke's proviso may require only 'enough and as good' relative to a pre-property baseline, not absolute equality—improvements benefit all through trade.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Property regimes create wealth and development that provide opportunities unavailable in commons; the proviso might be satisfied by these broader gains.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Requiring perfect proviso-satisfaction would make any property system impossible, suggesting the standard should be good-faith effort, not metaphysical perfection.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Historical property regimes involved enclosure, colonization, and dispossession that systematically denied others access to comparable resources.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
No actual society has ensured remaining land/resources are genuinely equivalent in quality, accessibility, and productive capacity to what was appropriated.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
If the proviso is a binding moral condition for legitimate property, its universal violation delegitimizes existing property distributions.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.