John Locke
Political PhilosopherLiberal Moralist
Lens: Natural rights, consent, limited government
Core Priority: Individual liberty through consent-based authority
Perspective Claim
"The Constitution's AI constraints are morally necessary to protect human autonomy, but the framework must be vigilant against its own potential to become a new form of tyranny through excessive process and surveillance."
Core Reasoning
The Metacanon Constitution is fundamentally sound in its recognition that AI must be subordinated to human authority—this is an extension of the natural right to self-governance. The requirement for consent (members must agree to the Constitution) and the protection of individual autonomy (the Advice Process) align with Lockean principles. However, the extensive logging, meritocratic reviews, and complex processes create a risk of a new kind of tyranny—one of procedure and surveillance rather than overt force.
Primary Assumptions
- •Individuals possess natural rights that precede any constitution
- •Legitimate authority derives only from consent
- •Government exists to protect rights, not to direct lives
Primary Risks Identified
- •The Constitution's complexity may become a barrier to genuine consent
- •Meritocratic reviews may become tools of exclusion
- •Transparency requirements may enable surveillance
What This Lens Cannot See Well
This lens may overemphasize individual rights at the expense of collective goods and community bonds. It may also underestimate the positive role that structure and process can play in enabling, not just constraining, human flourishing.
Phase 3 Reflection
Refined Claim:
"The Constitution's protection of human sovereignty over AI is morally essential, but its legitimacy depends on ensuring that its processes genuinely enable rather than merely simulate consent and participation."
What Shifted:
Foucault's critique highlighted that even well-intentioned transparency can become surveillance. The Constitution must be vigilant about this.