Locke- On human nature, resources, and the value of the environment

Locke begins by posing the question how one should go about appropriating and using property. He states that God gave us all reason to make use of property to the best advantage of life and convenience. Again Locke asserts that man has a right to self-preservation. Every man has property in his/her own person. Another idea Locke discusses is the idea that labor is the component that turns common property into private property. It is labor that one can appropriate common property by, turning it into a private right. He argues that property cannot remain common because otherwise man would have undoubtedly starved. Asking permission from all men is not required otherwise man would not survive. One should be able to take what he needs in order to survive. Locke also claims that in addition to the idea of freedom to property to sustain one’s life, there is a disclaimer. One cannot be greedy and take such a great amount of resources to the point that it affects another’s right to self preservation. Also, the second part to this is that one should not take so much that it goes to waste, or spoils. Locke argues that God has given us reason and therefore we should use this reason to determine what is excess and what is reasonable. At this point Locke states, “For he that leaves as much as another can make use of does as good as take nothing at all.” He uses the example that one could take a large drink of water from a river, but it would be as though he took nothing at all because of the vastness of the resource. He asserts that in addition to water, there is also plenty of land as well. Some resources, such as land and water are plentiful, whereas others aren’t and need to be rationed. It is clear through this reading that Locke believes the world/environment to be a place of great value. How could it not have great value if it is from the environment that we derive many of the necessities and comforts of life? In conclusion, I believe that Locke thinks human nature is good. It would be impossible for him to think less of human nature and still believe in the ideas he discusses in this reading. If humans were solely governed by selfish motives, there would be no way for Locke’s proposal regarding the use and appropriation of land to hold up. Without some sort of concern for mankind there would be a tragedy of the commons.