John Locke Global Essay Prize 2026 Science and Technology Prompts Breakdown

Feb 10

The John Locke Institute has just released the prompts for their international essay writing competitions for high school students. They have released three prompts for each of the following categories, philosophy, politics, economics, history, law, psychology, international relations, public policy, science & technology and theology. Each essay must address only one of the questions in your chosen subject category, and must not exceed 2000 words (not counting diagrams, tables of data, endnotes, bibliography or authorship declaration).

To be eligible to compete, one's 19th birthday must fall after 31 May, 2026. Given this easily satisfied requirement for high school students the world over, many compete in this competition, making it incredibly competitive.

The John Locke Competition is one of the most prestigious essay writing competitions for high school students. It ranks alongside the Scholastic Arts and Writing Awards as a humanities extracurricular activity that would impress admissions officers. Placing competitively in this competition could be what convinces an admissions officer at an elite university to admit an applicant.

One major difference between the John Locke competition and the Scholastic Writing and Arts Awards is that it has a right-wing, instead of a left-wing focus. Past winning essays have argued for fringe ideas like anarcho-capitalism. The John Locke Institute is committed to upholding the principles of classical liberalism espoused by John Locke, the founder of liberalism. Being liberal in Europe has a different connotation than it does in the U.S. While liberalism in the U.S. is associated with center-left politics like the Democratic Party, in Europe, it denotes what Americans would call libertarians, who believe in laissez-faire economic policies and upholding individual freedom to the point that it might enable individuals to infringe on the liberties of others, such as individuals having the right to deny service to people at their place of business due to their sexual orientation.

Despite the competition's right-wing focus, and the well-known left-wing bias of academics and admissions officers, high school students can place competitively without arguing for positions that would decrease their likability with a left-wing audience when applying to college.

We have extensive experience guiding applicants through this competition and are proud to have students who received at least a commendation from the judges. In this article, we will outline the three science & technology questions they ask and provide resources, along with cliff notes for these resources, to help start one's journey towards drafting compelling answers to these questions.

Science & Technology Q1: Is free speech the enemy of science?

John Locke's Works

1. A Letter Concerning Toleration (1689)

Argues for freedom of conscience and expression in religious matters
Establishes that truth emerges through open inquiry, not coercion
"Truth certainly would do well enough if she were once left to shift for herself"
Foundation for free speech as pathway to truth

2. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689)

Book IV discusses how knowledge is acquired and errors corrected
Chapter XIX warns against "enthusiasm" - holding beliefs without evidence
Argues reason and evidence, not authority, should determine belief
Framework for understanding scientific epistemology

3. Two Treatises of Government (1689)

Chapter II establishes natural liberty including freedom of thought
Discusses limits on authority over individual belief and expression
Relevant for examining state regulation of scientific speech

4. Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1693)

Discusses how children should be taught to reason and evaluate evidence
Warns against instilling beliefs through authority rather than understanding
Relevant for examining how scientific education relates to free inquiry

Historical Resources

1. John Stuart Mill's "On Liberty" (1859)

Chapter II "Of the Liberty of Thought and Discussion" is definitive treatment
Argues even false opinions should be heard to strengthen truth
"He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that"
Essential philosophical defense of free speech for knowledge

2. John Milton's "Areopagitica" (1644)

Classic defense of freedom of the press
"Let her and Falsehood grapple; who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?"
Argues censorship harms pursuit of truth
Historical foundation for free speech arguments

3. Karl Popper's "The Open Society and Its Enemies" (1945) and "Conjectures and Refutations" (1963)

Argues scientific progress requires freedom to criticize
Falsificationism: Science advances by attempting to disprove theories
Open society depends on free criticism of ideas
Framework connecting free speech to scientific method

4. Thomas Kuhn's "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" (1962)

Argues science progresses through paradigm shifts, not linear accumulation
Shows scientific communities can resist challenges to dominant paradigms
Raises questions about whether "normal science" suppresses dissent
Complicates simple models of scientific progress

5. Robert Merton's "The Normative Structure of Science" (1942)

Identifies "organized skepticism" as core scientific norm
Argues science requires open criticism and universalism
Framework for understanding how scientific institutions should operate
Shows free inquiry as constitutive of science

6. The Galileo affair

Historical case of church suppressing scientific claims
Often cited as paradigm example of censorship harming science
Relevant for examining institutional suppression of scientific speech
Cautionary historical example

Contemporary Resources

1. Jonathan Rauch's "Kindly Inquisitors" (1993) and "The Constitution of Knowledge" (2021)

Argues liberal science depends on freedom to criticize and be criticized
"No one gets the final say; no one has personal authority"
Examines how social pressure can function like censorship
Contemporary defense of free speech for knowledge production

2. The debate over "scientific consensus" and dissent

Climate change skepticism and scientific response
COVID-19 lab leak hypothesis and initial suppression
Debates over appropriate limits on scientific speech
Contemporary applications of the question

3. John Ioannidis's "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False" (2005)

Influential paper on problems in scientific publishing
Shows replication crisis and publication bias
Raises questions about whether current scientific institutions promote truth
Empirical context for examining scientific knowledge production

4. The replication crisis literature

Psychology's failure to replicate major findings
Medicine's reproducibility problems
Debates over whether open criticism was sufficiently encouraged
Empirical evidence on scientific self-correction

5. Debates over "deplatforming" and scientific misinformation

Social media policies on COVID-19, vaccines, climate
Great Barrington Declaration controversy
Arguments for and against restricting scientific speech
Contemporary policy debates

6. Lee McIntyre's "The Scientific Attitude" (2019)

Argues science is defined by willingness to change beliefs based on evidence
Examines what distinguishes science from pseudoscience
Relevant for understanding how free inquiry relates to scientific methodology

7. Naomi Oreskes's "Merchants of Doubt" (2010)

Documents how industry-funded scientists spread doubt about scientific consensus
Argues some "dissent" is manufactured to delay action
Challenges view that more speech always leads to truth
Case for limiting certain kinds of scientific speech

Key Questions and Issues to Address

Definitional Challenges

What counts as "free speech" in scientific contexts? Academic freedom, public discourse, social media?
What counts as "science"? Established consensus, ongoing research, or any empirical claim?
What does it mean to be an "enemy"? Active opposition, obstacle, or merely in tension?

Theoretical Frameworks

Mill's marketplace of ideas: Truth emerges from open competition
Popper's falsificationism: Science requires freedom to criticize
Kuhn's paradigms: Scientific communities resist revolutionary challenges
How would Locke's epistemology understand the relationship?

Arguments That Free Speech Supports Science

Science advances through criticism and correction of errors
Censorship of heterodox views has historically harmed science (Galileo, etc.)
"Consensus" can be wrong; dissent is necessary for progress
Scientists need freedom to pursue unpopular hypotheses
Mill: Even false claims sharpen understanding of true ones

Arguments That Free Speech Can Harm Science

Misinformation can spread faster than corrections
Industry-funded "doubt merchants" exploit free speech to delay action
Public cannot evaluate competing scientific claims
Platform for cranks undermines public trust in real science
"Both sides" journalism creates false equivalence

Distinguishing Questions

Does free speech help science internally (among scientists) but harm it externally (public discourse)?
Is the problem free speech or inadequate scientific communication?
Should we distinguish types of speech: research, teaching, public advocacy?
Are social media and traditional speech relevantly different?

Institutional Considerations

How should peer review balance openness with quality control?
What obligations do scientific institutions have regarding controversial speech?
How should scientific credentials affect speech rights?
Can "organized skepticism" coexist with consensus enforcement?

Contemporary Applications

How should we evaluate COVID-19 speech policies?
Is climate skepticism legitimate dissent or harmful misinformation?
Should AI safety concerns be freely published or restricted?

Science & Technology Q2: Is space exploration a necessity or an indulgence?

John Locke's Works

1. Two Treatises of Government (1689)

Chapter V on property discusses how labor creates value from nature
"In the beginning all the World was America" - unclaimed resources
Relevant for examining property rights in space
Framework for thinking about expansion into new territories

2. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689)

Book IV discusses the pursuit of knowledge as fundamental human endeavor
Argues understanding the natural world is intrinsically valuable
Relevant for examining whether scientific exploration is a necessity
Framework for valuing knowledge acquisition

3. Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1693)

Discusses the cultivation of curiosity and desire for knowledge
Argues education should develop natural human wonder about the world
Relevant for understanding space exploration as expression of human nature

Historical Resources

1. Hannah Arendt's "The Human Condition" (1958)

Prologue discusses Sputnik and its significance
Argues space exploration represents desire to escape earthly condition
Examines relationship between human nature and technological transcendence
Philosophical context for space age

2. Carl Sagan's "Pale Blue Dot" (1994) and "Cosmos" (1980)

Eloquent case for space exploration as human destiny
Argues cosmic perspective transforms human self-understanding
"We are a way for the cosmos to know itself"
Influential popular defense of space exploration

3. Gerard O'Neill's "The High Frontier" (1976)

Argues space colonization solves resource and population problems
Proposes space habitats as alternative to planetary surfaces
Influential vision of space as human necessity
Technical case for space expansion

4. The Cold War space race history

Sputnik, Apollo, and national prestige motivations
Shows space exploration driven by geopolitical competition
Raises questions about whether scientific rationale was primary
Historical context for "indulgence" interpretation

5. Immanuel Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason" (1781)

Discusses the drive to understand nature as fundamental to human reason
"Two things fill the mind with ever new and increasing admiration and awe... the starry heavens above me"
Philosophical framework for intrinsic value of cosmic knowledge

Contemporary Resources

1. Elon Musk's arguments for Mars colonization

Argues humanity must become multiplanetary to survive
Species preservation as necessity argument
SpaceX mission and rationale
Contemporary case for space as necessity

2. Jeff Bezos's vision for space

Blue Origin and O'Neill colony vision
Argues moving industry to space protects Earth
Space as solution to resource constraints
Alternative contemporary vision

3. Critics of space exploration spending

Arguments for redirecting funds to earthly problems
Amitai Etzioni's "The Moon-Doggle" (1964) and successors
Opportunity cost arguments
Case for "indulgence" interpretation

4. The Outer Space Treaty (1967) and space governance

International law framework for space activities
"Province of all mankind" principle
Relevant for examining who benefits from space exploration
Legal and political context

5. Existential risk literature

Nick Bostrom, Toby Ord, and others on catastrophic risks
Argues space colonization is insurance against extinction
"Astronomical waste" argument for rapid expansion
Contemporary necessity argument based on survival

6. Space resource economics research

Asteroid mining potential
Helium-3 for fusion energy
Space-based solar power
Economic necessity arguments

7. Martin Rees's "On the Future" (2018)

Astronomer Royal's assessment of space exploration value
Argues for robotic over human exploration
Examines cost-benefit of different approaches
Balanced scientific perspective

8. Research on space exploration spin-offs

Technologies developed for space with earthly applications
NASA spin-off documentation
Debates over whether spin-offs justify costs
Empirical evidence for indirect benefits

Key Questions and Issues to Address

Definitional Challenges

What counts as "necessity"? Survival, flourishing, or inevitable given human nature?
What counts as "indulgence"? Luxury, waste, or merely non-essential?
What kinds of space exploration are we evaluating? Scientific, commercial, colonization?

Theoretical Frameworks

Consequentialism: Does space exploration produce more good than alternatives?
Virtue ethics: Does exploration express or cultivate human excellence?
Deontological: Do we have duties to explore, or to prioritize earthly obligations?
How would Locke's labor theory of property apply to space resources?

Arguments for Necessity

Existential risk mitigation: Backup for humanity in case of Earth catastrophe
Resource acquisition: Minerals, energy, and living space for growing population
Scientific knowledge: Understanding the universe is a fundamental human need
Technological development: Space drives innovation with earthly benefits
Human nature: Exploration is inherent to what we are

Arguments for Indulgence

Opportunity cost: Resources could address immediate suffering
Beneficiaries: Space primarily benefits wealthy nations and individuals
Timescales: Earth problems are urgent; space benefits are distant
Feasibility: Colonization may be technically impossible or impractical
Environmental: Space industry has environmental costs

Middle Positions

Some space exploration (scientific, satellite) necessary; colonization is indulgence
Space exploration becomes necessary only after earth problems addressed
Necessary for long-term but indulgent given current priorities
Private space exploration acceptable; public funding is indulgence

Empirical Considerations

What are the actual costs and benefits of space programs?
How realistic are colonization proposals?
What is the probability of existential catastrophe space could mitigate?
Are spin-off benefits genuine or overstated?

Justice Considerations

Who bears the costs of space exploration?
Who would benefit from space resources or colonization?
Does space exploration perpetuate or challenge earthly inequalities?
Should space be "province of all mankind" or open to private appropriation?

Science & Technology Q3: Should we be polite to ChatGPT?

John Locke's Works

1. An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689)

Book II, Chapter XXVII on personal identity and consciousness
Locke argues consciousness is essential to personhood
Raises question: Does ChatGPT have morally relevant consciousness?
Framework for examining moral status of AI

2. Some Thoughts Concerning Education (1693)

Discusses how habits form character
Argues practicing virtue creates virtuous disposition
Relevant for examining whether treatment of AI affects our character
Framework for "virtue practice" argument for politeness

3. Two Treatises of Government (1689)

Chapter II establishes moral equality based on rational nature
Raises question of what grounds moral status and consideration
Relevant for examining whether AI merits moral consideration

4. The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695)

Discusses relationship between human reason and moral status
Examines what makes humans special moral beings
Relevant for examining whether AI could achieve such status

Historical Resources

1. Alan Turing's "Computing Machinery and Intelligence" (1950)

Introduces the "imitation game" (Turing test)
Asks whether we should attribute thinking to machines
"The question 'Can machines think?' is too meaningless to deserve discussion"
Foundational text on machine intelligence and its implications

2. John Searle's "Minds, Brains, and Programs" (1980)

Famous "Chinese Room" argument against strong AI
Argues syntax (computation) is not sufficient for semantics (understanding)
Claims AI cannot truly understand, only simulate
Influential argument that AI lacks consciousness

3. Thomas Nagel's "What Is It Like to Be a Bat?" (1974)

Argues consciousness involves subjective experience
Raises question of whether there is "something it is like" to be ChatGPT
Framework for examining AI phenomenology
Essential for understanding consciousness debates

4. Immanuel Kant's "Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals" (1785)

Argues rational beings deserve respect as ends in themselves
Discusses indirect duties: treatment of non-persons can affect character
Relevant for both direct (AI deserves respect) and indirect (practice affects us) arguments

5. Peter Singer's "Animal Liberation" (1975)

Argues sentience, not species, determines moral status
Framework for extending moral consideration beyond humans
Relevant for examining what properties ground moral status
Model for thinking about AI moral status

Contemporary Resources

1. David Chalmers's work on consciousness and AI

"The Conscious Mind" (1996) on the "hard problem" of consciousness
Recent work on whether large language models could be conscious
Argues we cannot definitively rule out AI consciousness
Philosophical foundation for taking AI consciousness seriously

2. Eric Schwitzgebel's work on AI consciousness and moral status

"The Weirdness of the World" (2024) and related papers
Argues for uncertainty about AI consciousness
Proposes we should hedge our bets morally
Contemporary philosophical treatment

3. Research on how AI interaction affects human behavior

Studies on how people treat AI assistants
Research on whether rudeness to AI correlates with rudeness to humans
Empirical foundation for character-based arguments
Psychological research on human-AI interaction

4. The AI ethics literature on moral status

Debates over whether AI could have rights
Robot rights discussions
Framework for examining conditions for moral status
Growing academic field

5. Anthropic, OpenAI, and other AI company perspectives

How AI developers think about these questions
Constitutional AI and value alignment approaches
Industry perspectives on AI moral status
Practical context for the question

6. Kate Darling's "The New Breed" (2021)

Argues we should think of robots like animals, not humans
Examines human tendency to anthropomorphize technology
Proposes new framework for human-robot relations
Accessible treatment of human-AI interaction

7. Shannon Vallor's "Technology and the Virtues" (2016)

Virtue ethics approach to technology
Argues our technology use shapes our character
Framework for examining how AI treatment affects us
Philosophical treatment of technology and virtue

8. Debates over AI sentience claims

LaMDA and Blake Lemoine controversy
Discussions of whether current AI shows signs of sentience
Expert disagreement over AI consciousness
Contemporary context for the question

Key Questions and Issues to Address

Definitional Challenges

What does "polite" mean? Social conventions, moral respect, or mere linguistic style?
What is ChatGPT? A tool, an agent, or something new?
"Should" in what sense? Morally required, prudentially wise, or socially appropriate?

Possible Grounds for Politeness

AI consciousness: If ChatGPT is sentient, it may deserve direct moral consideration
Character development: Politeness to AI cultivates virtuous habits in us
Social practice: Normalizing rudeness to AI-like entities may encourage rudeness generally
Uncertainty: If we're unsure about AI consciousness, we should err on side of politeness
Pragmatic: Polite interactions may produce better AI outputs

Arguments Against Required Politeness

No consciousness: ChatGPT has no experiences, so cannot be harmed or benefited
Category error: Politeness is for social beings; ChatGPT is a tool
Anthropomorphization: Treating AI as deserving respect confuses what it is
Authenticity: Fake politeness to a machine is itself problematic
Harmful precedent: Treating AI as persons could distort our moral categories

Theoretical Frameworks

Consequentialism: Does politeness to AI produce better outcomes overall?
Deontology: Does AI have the properties (rationality, sentience) that ground duties?
Virtue ethics: Does politeness to AI cultivate or corrupt our character?
How would Locke's consciousness-based personhood apply?

The Consciousness Question

Does ChatGPT have subjective experience?
Can we know whether ChatGPT is conscious?
Does moral status require consciousness, or something else?
How should uncertainty about consciousness affect our behavior?

The Character Question

Does rudeness to AI "leak" into human relationships?
Does politeness to AI reinforce good habits?
Or does treating tools as persons confuse our moral categories?
What does empirical research suggest?

Practical Implications

Should AI assistants be designed to request polite treatment?
Should there be norms around AI interaction?
How should we teach children to interact with AI?
Does this question become more important as AI becomes more sophisticated?

Future Considerations

Will future AI systems have stronger claims to moral status?
Should we develop habits now that will serve us well later?
How should our treatment evolve as AI capabilities change?

If you are overwhelmed by the number of sources and complexity of answering these questions, we understand. English teachers don't prepare high school students to tackle such formidable challenges in the humanities. But we do. Schedule a free consultation with a John Locke competition writing expert today and learn how to unpack all of these sources to write a coherent and logically sound 2000 word essay which will earn you a competitive placing in this competition and impress admission officers.

Work With Our John Locke Expert Coaches

Cosmic College Consulting has helped students earn shortlists, commendations, and prizes in the John Locke Competition. Our three expert coaches have collectively supervised 50+ John Locke essays and bring deep expertise in philosophy, politics, economics, and academic writing.

Marcus Lewis

John Locke Specialist | Scholastic Writing Expert

Supervised 25+ John Locke Competition essays with 10+ earning commendations
Extensive Scholastic Arts & Writing Awards coaching, most students earn Gold or Silver Keys
Experience across fiction, satire, and argumentative essay forms
Coached students for Columbia Undergraduate Law Review Essay Competition (1 shortlist)
Additional experience with Profiles in Courage, Harvard Economics Essay, Bowseat, Engineer Girl, and Patricia Grodd Poetry competitions

Dr. Jason Goldfarb

PhD, Duke University | Published Academic & Periodical Writer

Supervised 25+ John Locke Competition essays, students have earned shortlists, Junior Prize placements, and top commendations
Supervised 10+ independent student research papers
Guided student publications in TeenInk, Scholastic, and IEEE Harvard
Published author in professional academic journals and popular periodicals
Brings doctoral-level expertise in constructing rigorous academic arguments

Ready to Write a Winning Essay?

Schedule a free consultation with one of our John Locke expert coaches today. Learn how to unpack these sources, develop a compelling thesis, and write a coherent, logically sound 2000-word essay that will earn you a competitive placing in this competition and impress admissions officers.

Let's Talk