For tomorrow, look for the contrasts between Hobbes' account of power and Locke's account (Par. 3); Hobbes' account of liberty and Locke's account (Par. 6 -- note, for Hobbes liberty IS license!); Hobbes' account of equality and Locke's account (Pars. 4 and 54); Hobbes' account of laws of nature and Locke's account (Par. 6ff); Hobbes' account of Reason/rationality and Locke's account (Par. 6ff); and Hobbes' account of the state of nature and Locke's account (Pars. 16-21).

With the account of property, can you tease out what it is, for Locke, to have a property in something?  What does it mean, for example, to say that we each own ourselves?  What is a commons?  What is the process through which individuals can take something out of a commons and make it their property?  What are the limits on what can be appropriated through this process (the "Lockean Provisos")? What is the theory of the value of property that Locke is relying upon? What role does money play in his account?  Are there problems with any aspects of this account?

Rousseau offers a very explicit argument against Locke's account of the rightful accumulation of property in the state of nature.  What is Rousseau's argument?

Smith offers a strikingly different account of property from Locke's, one which questions whether, in primitive political societies, one can have a rightful property in land at all.  Which aspects of Locke's account is Smith rejecting?

So much to talk about tomorrow!