Who became famous for arguing that people have the right to resist tyrannical rulers and that government exists to serve the public good, differing from Calvinist thought?

Study for the PS4700 American Political Thought Test. Enhance your knowledge with multiple-choice questions, hints, and explanations. Get ready for your exam with ease!

Multiple Choice

Who became famous for arguing that people have the right to resist tyrannical rulers and that government exists to serve the public good, differing from Calvinist thought?

Explanation:
The idea being tested is the early American claim that government exists to promote the public good and that people have a right to resist rulers who become tyrannical, a stance that challenges strict Calvinist obedience to authority. Jonathan Mayhew, a Boston minister, articulated this view clearly in his influential sermon on unlimited submission and non-resistance. He argued that civil government is established for the welfare of the people and that political authority derives from the people, not from a divinely guaranteed right to absolute obedience. When rulers violate the public good or turn tyrannical, resistance is morally permissible. This position marks a clear departure from Calvinist thought, which tended to emphasize obedience to magistrates as part of divine order. Luther Martin, Samuel Seabury, and James Otis are not the figures most associated with this particular argument in the way Mayhew is. Seabury and many Loyalists tended to emphasize allegiance to existing authority, while Otis focused on colonial rights and legal arguments against British policies rather than the principled right to resist tyranny as a general political principle.

The idea being tested is the early American claim that government exists to promote the public good and that people have a right to resist rulers who become tyrannical, a stance that challenges strict Calvinist obedience to authority. Jonathan Mayhew, a Boston minister, articulated this view clearly in his influential sermon on unlimited submission and non-resistance. He argued that civil government is established for the welfare of the people and that political authority derives from the people, not from a divinely guaranteed right to absolute obedience. When rulers violate the public good or turn tyrannical, resistance is morally permissible. This position marks a clear departure from Calvinist thought, which tended to emphasize obedience to magistrates as part of divine order.

Luther Martin, Samuel Seabury, and James Otis are not the figures most associated with this particular argument in the way Mayhew is. Seabury and many Loyalists tended to emphasize allegiance to existing authority, while Otis focused on colonial rights and legal arguments against British policies rather than the principled right to resist tyranny as a general political principle.

Subscribe

Get the latest from Examzify

You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our privacy policy