Essay/Term paper: Human nature and the declaration of independence

Essay, term paper, research paper:  Humanities Essays

Human Nature and the Declaration of Independence

by Jake Repp

I would like to show that the view of human nature that is shown in The
Declaration of Independence is taken more from the Bible and that that view is
in disagreement with two of the three esays given in class. The Biblical
perspective of man is that he was created by a divine Creator with a specific
plan in mind and made in the image of his Creator. Men are entitled to the
pursuit of happiness but also required by the Laws of Nature and Nature's God to
be the just attendants of the land and of the governed. The Nature of man is
sinful so that they must be governed but those who govern must be accountable to
God just as the founding fathers were. God is Sovereign over men as the final
Judge.

The Declaration of Independence is a document co-written by the
founding fathers in order to declare their independence of the Crown of Britain.
They belived this to be within their rights indowed upon them by their Creator.
Believing that they were under religious persecution and certain forms of
"absolute tyranny" from Britian the founding fathers felt it was necessary to
break the bonds that connected them to the monarchy. Not only did they feel they
had the God given right to do that but they also based their arguments on the
workings of governments of the time and contemporary theories of government of
writers and political-social thinkers of their time.

The three essays that were given to us in class, Politics by Aristotle,
Of Commonwealth by Thomas Hobbes, and Of the Limits of Government by John
Locke are all very intersting essays on how government is supposed to funtion.
Although the founding fathers probably read all three of these essays and
simialar philosphical thought went into the writing of The Declaration of
Independence I think that the only essay of the really used by the founding
fathers was Of the Limits of Government by John Locke. Unfortunately the
version of this essay given to us in class was truncated and consisted actually
of two different essays written by John Locke. . Thomas Hobbes [1588-1679] is
the founder of the theories of Hobbism which calls on absolute monarchy in order
to deal with what he calls inherently selfish, aggrandizing nature of humanity.

Aristotle[384-322 B.C.] was a Greek philosopher who studied under Plato.
Aristotlelian logic (Aristotle's deductive means of reasoning) especially
sylogism_ dealt with relationship between proposistions in terms of their form
instead of their content. By using this kind of deductive reasoning with a major
premise, a minor premise, and a conclusion; for example, All human beings are
mortal, the major premis, I am a human being, the minor premise, therefore, I am
mortal, the conclusion Aristotle found all of his truth. I can't connect
Aristotle's view of human nature with that of the Founding Fathers and since an
omnipotent deity was not feasible for Aristotle (since he couldn't see it and
therefor couldn't belive in it) he comes to a different conclusion that doesn't
agree what the founding fathers said. Aristotle's begins by analyzing the
political structure starting at what he see's as the most basic of human unions
(man and woman). Aristotle writes,

"In the first place there must be a union of those who can not exist
without each other; namely of male and female, that the race may continue (and
this union which is formed not of deliberate purpose, but because, in common
with other animals and with plants, mankind have a natural desire to leave
behind an image of themselves)..."

The first difference between The Declaration of Independence and
Politics is seen when you compare this quote with one from The Declaration of
Independence ,

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights..."

The founding father's saw the deliberate purpose of a Creator in nature
where Aristotle sees mankind on par with plants and animals. Aristotle explains
that we have a natural desire to leave behind an image of ourselves. Man is an
electrochemical machine that operates simply on what happens around him and,
like an animal, finds a suitable mate and joins himself to her to make furthur
offspring of himself. Following this kind of thinking, governments join
themselves together just for the purpose of making war later making treaties and
finally making more governments to further this very productive cycle.

Aristotle goes to make other assumptions which are clearly in
contradiction with the aspects of The Declaration of Independence that I
discussed in the first paragraph. Aristotle's writes, "...The state is by nature
clearly prior to the family and to the individual, since the whole is of
necessity prior to the part..." According to the Biblical view of man, God cares
more about the individual than about the state and man is created in the image
of God in the first place. The Declaration of Independence states in order for
the individuals to secure their unalienable (that is God given) rights of life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness, "Governments are instituted among men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed."

Of Commonwealth could only be related to the thinking of the founding
fathers in a most basic way to their ideals. Thomas Hobbes also seems to be a
syllogistic thinker like Aristotle one, because he never thinks above elemental,
getting his most basic logical conclusions from observations of nature and
number two, for thinking along phylisophical lines that don't agree with the
Biblical perspective. Hobes sees man as an elevated creature capable of self-
governing, self-evolving conduct. Hobes doesn't understand the Biblical view of
fallen man, "The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked;
who can know it? (Jeremiah 17:9)" Hobbes also fails to see the need for a
separation of powers in Government when he talks about an absolute monarchy and
the Commonwealth being the solution to government.

The idea of seperation of powers is a biblical idea that come from
Isaiah, "For the Lord is our Judge, the Lord is our lawgiver, the Lord is our
king. (Isaiah 33:22)" This is the system that our forfathers set up and I'm sure
glad that Cliton is not my Judge, Lawgiver and King all in one. Baron Charles
Louis Joseph de Secondat Montesquieu [1689-1755] a French professor, author and
legal philosopher who wrote the book "Spirit of the Laws" (which greatly
impacted the American government, and was the source most frequently quoted by
the Founding Fathers, next to the Bible_) on the subject of separating of powers
in relation to human nature wrote,

"Nor is there liberty if the power of judging is not separated from
legislative power and from executive power. If it [the power of judging] were
joined to legislative power, the power over life and liberty of the citizens
would be arbitrary, for the judge would be the legislator. If it were joined to
the executive power, the judge could have the force of an oppressor. All would
be lost if the same...body of principal men...exercised these three powers."

Also in comparison to the ideology of monarchy and commonwealth of
Thomas Hobbes, Montesquieu wrote, "The principles of Christianity, deeply
engraved on the heart, would be infinitely more powerful than the false honor of
monarchies, than the humane virtues of republics, or the servile fear of
despotic states."

John Locke's view of human nature and politics greatly influenced the
founding fathers in many of their other writings including The Constitution of
the United States. In the his treatise "Of Civil Government" Locke writes,

"For Men being all the Workmanship of one Omnipotent, and infinitely
wise Maker_they are his Property_Those Grants God made of the World to Adam and
to Noah, and his Sons...has given the Earth to the Children of Men, given it to
Mankind in common...
_ also given them reason make use of it to the best Advantage of Life
and Convenience."

John Locke's view of the perfectly governed body as one in which all men
answer to God can is seen when in the same treatise he writes,

"...It is also evident what liberty remains to men in reference to their
eternal salvation, and that is, that every one should do what he in his
conscience is persuaded to be acceptable to the Almighty, on whose good pleasure
and acceptance depends his eternal happiness; for obedience is due in the first
place to God, and afterwards to the laws."

It seems pretty clear to me when I readThe Declaration of Independence
and when I read quotes from the founding fathers and their contemporaries that
it was the work of strong Bible believing men that first made the monumental
leap in breaking union with Britian. Unfortunately their words and lives have
gone by the wayside in our hearts and minds.Instead of learning about George
Washington's famous words of Christian faith or how he emerged unscathed from
battle with his uniform riddeled with bullet holes our History books teach us
all about how he could not lie when he chopped down the cherry tree. If men such
as Hobes and Aristotle could have even welled up enough courage in their cold
and timid souls 200 years ago to break the tyrrany of the British, I strongly
believe that our country would have quickly decayed in immorality and greed.

"So whither you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory
of God."
(1Cor 10:31)

- Christianity and the Constitution p.51,53 ; America's Providential History
p.156 ; Myth of Separation p.195-96