This question is incomplete, here´s the complete question.
Read the passage from Two Treatises of Government
(1690) by John Locke.
Which statement best explains an Enlightenment
position on the divine right to rule?
This paternal, regal power being by divine right only
his, it leaves no room for human prudence, or consent,
to place it any where else, for if only one man hath a
divine right to the obedience of mankind, no body can
claim that obedience, but he that can shew that right;
nor can men's consciences, by any other pretence, be
obliged to it. And thus, this doctrine cuts up all
government by the roots.
Which statement best explains an Enlightenment
position on the divine right to rule?
O If only one person has the authority to rule, then no
one else, even members of government, may have
authority, so divine right undermines civil society.
O If only one person has the authority to rule, there
should be no confusion about how to follow the law,
so divine right supports the goals of civil society.
If only one person has the authority to rule, the
people will always eventually conflict with that ruler,
so divine right undermines civil society.
If only one person has the authority to rule, all of the
public servants they appoint will act in good faith, so
divine right supports the goals of civil society.
Answer: If only one person has the authority to rule, then no one else, even members of government, may have authority, so divine right undermines civil society.
Explanation:
The first treatise addressed the king´s divine right to rule by descent from Adam, an idea Locke firmly rejected, despite being a religious person himself. As one of the most influential philosophers of the Enlightenment, Locke held that governments were built by naturally free people through a social contract in which the ruler´s authority stems from the consent of the ruled.
