Human Nature in Classical and Modern Liberalism
Classical and modern liberalism share fundamental views on human nature but diverge on the extent of individualism and social responsibility.
Both classical and modern liberalism a level Politics view humans as rational individuals capable of making their own decisions based on self-interest. They promote equality of opportunity and tolerance, restricting individual freedom only when it threatens the freedom of others.
Highlight: Both strands of liberalism hold a positive view of human nature and emphasize the importance of individual rationality.
Classical liberals, such as John Locke, believe that humans are guided by self-interest but also show concern for others. Mary Wollstonecraft argued that both men and women are capable of rational thought, challenging gender-based discrimination.
Quote: "Locke-humans guided by self-interest but concerned for others"
Modern liberals, while agreeing with the basic tenets of individual rationality, recognize the need for social justice awareness and favor some state intervention. John Rawls, a prominent modern liberal thinker, posited that humans can be selfish but are also sympathetic to the less fortunate.
Definition: Foundational equality refers to the liberal belief that all people are born equal and entitled to the same legal and political rights.
The key difference between classical and modern liberalism in their view of human nature lies in the concept of individualism. Classical liberals promote egotistical individualism, emphasizing self-reliance and personal responsibility. In contrast, modern liberals favor developmental individualism, recognizing the need for societal support to help individuals reach their full potential.
Vocabulary: Meritocracy is a system where advancement is based on individual ability and hard work, a concept valued by both classical and modern liberals.
