In Aristotle’s view, a city is wholly made up of citizens. So to first be a citizen, a person must first be apart of a city. Aristotle continues by saying that there may be no one right answer to what a citizen is. A citizen in a democracy versus a citizen in an oligarchy could be two different things while still being defined as citizens. Aristotle however does have some conditions that are to be followed to exclude certain people as being citizens. Aristotle firmly states that a naturalized citizen is no citizen at all, because place of birth of residence is open for aliens and slaves alike. Reasoning from Aristotle, slaves and aliens cannot become citizens. Building off of this, Aristotle clearly states of only one aspect that would constitute being a citizen; being apart of the administration of justice, and …show more content…
In section 6 of Locke's Second Treatise, Locke defines the law of natures as: That reason is the law of nature which guides every person. This reason as Locke says, tells humans that no one should harm another in, “his life, health, liberty, or possessions.” (Locke 316) This is because God has made every man and that every man is the property of God. The only reason to harm another person is in self-preservation of yourself. Section 7 falls much of the same as Section 6 does, but with one glaring addition. The addition being that everyone has a right to stop the transgressors of the law of nature. In Section 6, it states that you can only stop another person if it is for your own self-preservation. In section 7, any other person is allowed to stop a transgressor of the law of nature when it comes to protecting someone else's self-preservation. Section 6 makes mention of no authority to destroy one another, unless they break the law of nature. Section 7 only says to punish the transgressor. Punishing the transgressor could limit the life, liberty, or property of the transgressor which nobody should do because that would be violating God's