Locke was very much a man of his times, partly because he did so much to shape them. He was born into an England that was teetering on the brink of enlightenment, and he helped to push the country over the edge. By the late 17th century, the beliefs in reasonable religion and secular values were overtaking a blind confidence in authority. Individual freedoms were taking central stage in political debates. Excitement over modern technologies and abilities were beginning to replace a worshipful focus on the ancient world. Locke embraced all of these trends and became their most influential spokesman.
The political scene during Locke's time was unstable. In the wake of civil war, “Oliver Cromwell’ had brought temporary peace. With Cromwell gone by the mid-17th century, however, Parliament and Crown reentered an ardent struggle for power. Because Lord Ashley, Locke's employer, was first the right hand man of King Charles II and then the leader of his opposition in Parliament, Locke found himself at the center of political maneuverings and intrigue. He helped to frame the constitution for the colony of Carolina, and wrote the treatises that justified the Glorious Revolution in which William of Orange seized the throne from King James, brother of Charles. Locke's two Treatises of Government, published anonymously, argued that the only justified government was one that ruled contractually rather than by the ruler's whimsy, thus laying the foundation for a limited kingship, heavily tethered by Parliament and the will of the people. Years later, the colonists in America would use Locke's arguments as the basis for their own “revolution”, claiming that King George had failed to abide by his contract, thereby forfeiting his right to rule over them.
Locke was also extremely active in religious affairs. A heated Protestant/Catholic divide helped to make the stormy political scene of late 17th England that much more turbulent. Issues of religious intolerance and forced conversion were of paramount practical importance. Locke began his career on the side of authoritarian religious impositions, but quickly changed his mind. A 1675 visit to Cleves, which exposed him to a community where members of different churches lived together peacefully, might have helped sway his opinion toward religious toleration. Locke ended up writing several well-read and enormously controversial essays in favor of religious toleration. Locke's religious writings, as well his publication of the Essay landed him in a lengthy controversy with the Bishop of Worcester. Some material generated from their published debates, found its way into later editions of the Essay.
Locke's participation in modern scientific advances was largely the result of his close ties with Robert Boyle. Throughout Europe, education's focus on the ancient world was being challenged by thinkers who preferred to focus on new technology and modern ideas. Locke's Essay gave one of the decisive blows to the already ailing Scholastic movement.
Locke did not set out to write a book on education. In 1684, he was approached by his friend Edward Clarke, who asked for Locke's advice on how to best raise his newborn son. Locke responded with a series of letters, which he continued to send all the way up until 1691. During the course of these letter-writing years other friends, such as William Molyneux, asked to see the letters, and soon Locke's ideas on education were circulating among a small group of parents. According to the preface ofSome Thoughts, it was the members of this group of readers that ultimately persuaded Locke to publish his letters as a book.
Because it started as a series of letters, Some Thoughts does not present a systematic theory of education. As the title indicates, it merely presents some thoughts on the topic. Nonetheless it shows a great deal of insight into child psychology. When Locke speaks about "education", what he means is primarily moral education. The aim of education, in his view, is to give a man rational control over his passions and desires.
As Locke sees the world, there exist certain laws of nature, stemming from God, and we must only use our reason to discover these laws. The most basic law of nature states that we must defend all of God's creatures (both ourselves and others) because we are all children of God and beloved by him. Other laws state that we have a right to property and that we have a right to punish those who violate the laws of nature. By using our reason to discover these laws, and then by following the dictates of these laws, we not only create the ideal civil society (one governed by consensual contract) but we avoid almost all human evils. The ability for human society to function in this ideal way, however, depends on the capacity people have for subverting their own passing whimsies to the dictates of reason. If people do not have this capacity, then civil society cannot maintain itself because the laws of nature will not be heeded. Some Thoughts, then, can be seen as a training manual for the moral people Locke needs to populate his civil society.
Although some of Locke's concerns may seem trivial, he believes that nothing could be more important than education. As human beings, it is human beings that we are concerned with — both on the individual and societal levels — and the single most important ingredient in the formation of a human being is his education.
This is a very strong claim on Locke's part because many people might believe that education is not the single most important ingredient in the formation of a human being. Others might even find this to be a frightening prospect; does this mean that children of poorer parents who are not sent to good schools have no chance of becoming good people? However, when Locke talks about education he is not talking about what school a child attends. In fact, Locke does not think children should go to school at all. He thinks that a private tutor should teach them at home. Although this solution may seem elitist, Locke believes that parents are capable of performing the role of private tutor. Locke does not believe that an academic education has much to do with forming a sound mind. When Locke talks about the importance of education he is talking about the importance of moral education; that is, about training a child to be virtuous. When viewed in this light his claim seems a little less radical, but it is still far from an obvious truth.
Locke addresses the comparative importance of environment and genetics. Locke puts a great deal of weight on the nurture side: he says that nine tenths of all men are the way they are because of the way in which they were nurtured. Others, though, might put more weight on the nature side; they might argue, for instance, that men are simply born with certain personalities and no matter how you try to educate them you will make very little headway in trying to change these personalities.
Locke is not completely dismissive of the nature side of the debate. While he thinks that children's minds are malleable, he admits, as we will see later, that each child is born with a certain temperament, or character. He even admits that this temperament can never be radically altered, but only encouraged in the best direction. The question, then, really does just come down to relative weights: given that children are each born with their own personalities, how much can education really be expected to form them? Locke is confident that education can go a long way, but anyone is free to object to this appraisal, especially since he never provides any arguments or hard evidence for his claims. This is something to look out for as you read Some Thoughts: is Locke justified in making his strong claims for the power of education? Does he fairly assess the nature side of the debate with his discussion of temperaments, or is his understanding of nature somewhat shallow and question begging? These are questions we will return to later.
