Early modern philosophy in Europe and Great Britain is awash with discussions of the emotions: they figure not only in philosophical psychology and related fields, but also in theories of epistemic method, metaphysics, ethics, political theory and practical reasoning in general. Moreover, interest in the emotions links philosophy with work in other, sometimes unexpected areas, such as medicine, art, literature, and practical guides on everything from child-rearing to the treatment of subordinates. Because of the breadth of the topic, this article can offer only an overview, but perhaps it will be enough to give some idea how philosophically rich and challenging the conception of the emotions was in this period. Most attention will be devoted to the familiar figures of early modern philosophy and how they conceived of the emotions as valuable, even indispensable aspects of embodied human life, which were largely constitutive of the self and identity that matter to us practically.
A word of caution is in order: there is a plethora of source material, and this entry is offered as a survey for organizing that material. Alas, much worthy material must be excluded here. This article and its supplements are designed for readers browsing for specific information, as well as those hardy souls who may wish to read it straight through. The main document offers a thematic overview of early modern discussions of the emotions. Separate links lead to documents devoted to the pre-history of the topic, as well as to some of the most important individual figures in early modern philosophy. Hope this helps! Mark brainly please this took me a lot of time!
<em>The correct answer is A. People have the right to overthrow a government that violates their rights
.</em>
John Locke developed the concept of natural law and stated in his book "Two treatises of government", that under natural law, all people have the right to life, liberty and heritage and contributed to the concept of Social Contract addressed by several enlightened thinkers, that under the "Social Contract" people could instigate a revolution against the government when it acted against the interests of the citizens, to replace the government with one that served the interests of the citizens. Locke considered that the citizen has the right to the revolution and that in certain circumstances, he has the obligation to exercise it to safeguard the people against tyranny.
While Locke believed it correct that the government was represented by a constitutional monarchy, ie a monarch supported by a parliament, he was against all absolute monarchy and conceptually did not give the monarch the place to care for a people without sanity but rather gave the State the priority of protecting the citizen against injustice. He said that injustices are what alter the natural state of tolerance and good judgment of citizens sometimes leading him to act with justice by their own hand and it is the State that must guarantee the right to life, property and freedom, to maintain the social order and give rise to the prosperity and happiness of individuals.
Locke was the son of Puritan Protestants and at the time of the Glorious Revolution he was living in the Netherlands and certainly supported this revolution.
Between 1775 and 1787, the Western territories faced several challenges, including a lack of roads and competition with Native Americans for land and hunting grounds.
Answer:
Each swimmer carries 40.6 ounces.
Explanation:
24+9= 35 ounces
35+5.6 = 40.6 ounces.
One way in which Kemal Atatürk of Turkey and <span>Shah Reza Pahlavi of Iran are similar is that both leaders "(1) implemented programs to modernize their
nations"</span>
