Locke on Consent, Societal Membership, and Political Obligation

Abstract There are two main theories of how express consent and tacit consent determine societal membership and political obligation in Locke's political philosophy. On the “Serious Stake” interpretation, all and only those who have a stake in the community (including some who only tacitly consent to membership) are members of society. On the “Express Consent” interpretation, all and only those who expressly consent to be or become members are members, and tacit consent determines political obligation. This essay articulates a version of the Express Consent interpretation on which express consent to X is given by means of conduct that has semantic meaning sufficient to count as agreement to X. It then explains how this interpretation can meet standard objections to the Express Consent interpretation while avoiding the serious textual problems that face the Serious Stake interpretation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
History of Philosophy Quarterly
Published
2025-04-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.5406/21521026.42.2.01
Primary Topic
Seventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Locke on Consent, Societal Membership, and Political Obligation

Samuel C. Rickless, Karina Ortiz Villa
History of Philosophy Quarterly
Seventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought
article

Locke on Consent, Societal Membership, and Political Obligation

Samuel C. Rickless, Karina Ortiz Villa
article en

Abstract

Abstract There are two main theories of how express consent and tacit consent determine societal membership and political obligation in Locke's political philosophy. On the “Serious Stake” interpretation, all and only those who have a stake in the community (including some who only tacitly consent to membership) are members of society. On the “Express Consent” interpretation, all and only those who expressly consent to be or become members are members, and tacit consent determines political obligation. This essay articulates a version of the Express Consent interpretation on which express consent to X is given by means of conduct that has semantic meaning sufficient to count as agreement to X. It then explains how this interpretation can meet standard objections to the Express Consent interpretation while avoiding the serious textual problems that face the Serious Stake interpretation.

History of Philosophy QuarterlyVol. 42(2)
University of California San Diego (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Seventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Locke on Consent, Societal Membership, and Political Obligation — Samuel C. Rickless, Karina Ortiz Villa · History of Philosophy Quarterly (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS