In the April 2011 issue (volume 72, number 2) of the Journal of the History of Ideas, S. Adam Seagrave published an article entitled "How Old Are Modern Rights? On the Lockean Roots of Contemporary Human Rights Discourse," which included a detailed discussion of several publications written by Brian Tierney. In the July 2011 issue (volume 72, number 3), Brian Tierney published a brief essay, "Response to S. Adam Seagrave's 'How Old Are Modern Rights? On the Lockean Roots of Contemporary Human Rights Discourse,'" addressing some of the points that Seagrave had made in his article. In "Identity and Diversity in the History of Ideas" Seagrave replies to Tierney.

No abstract

While the role of religion in the public life of contemporary liberal democracies constitutes a significant and ongoing topic of debate in political theory, scholars have thus far stopped short of addressing the root of this contentious issue in the apparent contradiction between self‐ownership and Divine ownership. I argue that a hitherto unnoticed and persuasive means of resolving this contradiction is implicit in the thought of John Locke. In fact, one of the more controversial issues in recent Lockean scholarship concerns the manner in which Locke's assertions of human self‐ownership cohere with his prominent theological commitments. These two sides of Locke's thought may be reconciled, and a potential pathway through the liberal democratic dilemma illumined, by elaborating upon a sophisticated theory of ownership that is implicitly present in Locke's Two Treatises of Government and his An Essay Concerning Human Understanding.

No abstract

No abstract