He gave the Western world the first modern theory of human nature and a new synthesis of the individualistic concept if liberty and the theory of government that was emerging out of the debates over natural law." (Locke 2003) look at Locke's early life shows why his thinking was so well rounded. He first was trained in an area of study that would have led him to become a 'man of the cloth' but instead of choosing that direction he turned to medicine as a field of study. Eventually he was granted the right to practice medicine, and did so, but also began to study in his quest to become a member of the Royal Society. Much of his training had to do with the manner of mankind's attempts to think from both a spiritual aspect and a physical aspect. His assertions included a mixture of many different areas, including; spiritual, medical, physical as well as external and internal influences on mankind's thinking process and the ideas and knowledge gained by those processes. These diverse influences could likely have been the primary reasons behind his thinking and they were certainly seen as a confluence of all mankind's attempts to gain knowledge, which is why Locke's ideas are so important to society even today.

Instead of gaining bits and pieces in a haphazard manner as defined by Hobbs, Descartes and even Bacon, Locke combined many of the aspects derived from their various viewpoints and set them down in his Essays for all to see and discuss. His second treatise was especially influential in that it played such a role in the way societal government was viewed and practiced.

With Locke mankind can finally discover the truth, or at least the idea of truth as presented by life's experiences.

Works Cited

Hollis III, Daniel W. (2006) Biblical Politics of John Locke, Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, Vol. 18, Issue 1, pp 205-207

Langley, Raymond J. (1998) Locke, John 1632-1704, Encyclopedia of World Biography, Bourgoin, Suzanne M. (ed), 2nd Ed. Detroit: Gale Research, http://find.galegroup.com/srcx/infomark.do?&contentset-GBRC&type=retrieve&tabID=T001&prodld=SRC-,...

Online ed. Detroit: Gale
http://find.galegroup.com/srcx/infomark.do?&contentSet=GSRC&type=retrieve&tabID=T001&prodId=SRC-3&docId=EJ2102101121&source=gale&srcprod=SRCS&userGroupName=salt82334&version=1.0, Accessed February 17, 2007

Ryan, Todd. (2006) Bayle's Critique of Lockean Superaddition, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Vol. 36, Issue 94, pp 511-554

Smith, Jad. (2006) Custom, Association, and the Mixed Mode, Locke's Early Theory of Cultural Reproduction, ELH, Vol 73, Issue 4, pp 831-853

Tarleton, Charles D. (2004) Reason and History in Locke's Second Treatise, Philosophy, Vol. 79, Issue 308, pp 247-279

When Locke presented his essays, much of what he presented concerned the deposing of the king. He stated that according to the method of thinking which he espoused kings were not endowed with an innate ability to govern, nor were they spiritually guided or given the divine right or authority to be king. He effectively denounced the speech made by King James I concerning his right to be king.

King James I stated; "I must not be taught my office...I would not have you meddle with such ancient rights as mine, as I have received from my predecessors. Possessing them more majorum (as ancestral customs)." (Rise Chapter 1)***

Locke essentially debunked that divine right by presenting an entirely new method for considering the rights of monarchs to lead, as well as their assertion that the were called to be king by divine right. Since external and internal experiences are what truly 'make the man' (according to Locke) then the rights asserted by the king to divinely rule the people was not legitimate. Needless to say, the affected king(s) along with the church officials who subordinated the king's right to rule, were not at all pleased with Locke.

I could not tell the citation on the fax you sent, but this came from that fax