2002
DOI: 10.2307/3088377
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Rethinking the Intolerant Locke

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0
1

Year Published

2008
2008
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
5
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…39 In his interpretation of Locke, this is taken as a reasonable secular principle for legislators, since "a magistrate trying to decide whether or not to suppress a religion he believes dangerous would have to ask not only whether suppressing the religion would promote the public good but also whether it would promote the public good for other magistrates to act on the same principle." 40 Tuckness argues this principle is worth saving from Locke's argument. He separates four different levels.…”
Section: Christian Liberty and Its Two Kingdomsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…39 In his interpretation of Locke, this is taken as a reasonable secular principle for legislators, since "a magistrate trying to decide whether or not to suppress a religion he believes dangerous would have to ask not only whether suppressing the religion would promote the public good but also whether it would promote the public good for other magistrates to act on the same principle." 40 Tuckness argues this principle is worth saving from Locke's argument. He separates four different levels.…”
Section: Christian Liberty and Its Two Kingdomsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Some academics (Tuckness, 2002) argue that this is possible, pointing out that the Lockean principles of toleration and human fallibility were used by the founding fathers of the United States such as Thomas Jefferson and James Madison to separate Church and State, as incorporated in the US constitution.…”
Section: The Debate On Secularismmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Desde la óptica lockeana, no había dudas de que hay una visión correcta (el cristianismo) y una miríada de visiones erradas. No obstante, del "error" de las segundas no se desprendía la necesidad de su prohibición; más bien al contrario, las ideas disímiles deberían ser aceptadas y, en la medida de lo posible, re-encausadas hacia la consecución del bienestar de la comunidad (CHEN, 1998;LORENZO, 2003;TUCKNESS, 2002). En principio los planteos de Locke y Nozick parecen compatibles; no obstante, esta apariencia se desvanece cuando consideramos que Nozick rechaza los conceptos de Comunidad y Bien Común que Locke precisa tomar en cuenta para darle sentido a su visión de la tolerancia.…”
Section: De Lo Justo a Lo Utópicounclassified