Skip to content
statementVerified

A Third Letter for Toleration continues the Proast controversy in print

In 1692 A Third Letter for Toleration continued Locke’s printed controversy with Jonas Proast. It is a dated third instrument, not the 1689 first Letter and not the 1690 Second Letter. In the causal graph this event strengthens Protection of Minority Rights, a driver that strengthens Having a say in government — an improving welfare path.

Read the full account

In 1692 A Third Letter for Toleration continued Locke’s printed controversy with Jonas Proast. It is a dated third instrument, not the 1689 first Letter and not the 1690 Second Letter. John Locke’s documented role is: He published a third, longer public letter after Proast replied again. The controversy is shared; the 1692 text is his. Later editors, printers, and excavators remain named where they appear.

Context

Proast had answered the Second Letter. The Third is long, public, and still not a statute. Later fourth-letter fragments are unfinished and are not this 1692 book. Gutenberg HTML is access, not 1692 type. Named others on the file: Jonas Proast, printers, and later collected-works editors share the controversy’s survival. The public setting is the file around 1692-01-01. Contribution type is direct. The instrument stays A Third Letter for Toleration continues the Proast controversy in print. The setting of A Third Letter for Toleration continues the Proast controversy in print is the public file around 1692-01-01. Contribution type is direct. Driver protection-of-minority-rights is attached because the significance names a mechanism from this act, not because a standing list needed coverage.

Later competitions, monuments, translations, UNESCO listings, museums, and adaptations are not converted into extra lifetime acts.

Why it matters

Direct on the 1692 text. Welfare reading improving. The attached mechanism is A dated third instalment kept coercive-religion arguments under public rebuttal. Lag to any modern indicator is not treated as zero. This path is attached because the mechanism is named from this act, not because a driver list needed coverage. The welfare reading on this path is improving.

Confidence is stated on the impact path, not hidden in adjectives. Mixed effects of A Third Letter for Toleration continues the Proast controversy in print are separate paths.

Who was responsible

Contribution type and responsibility level for each recorded actor — not sole-author shorthand.

  • John Locke

    Person

    Direct responsibility

    responsibility level 0.32 · verified

    He published a third, longer public letter after Proast replied again. The controversy is shared; the 1692 text is his.

What changed

Fact → Driver → Indicator. Relationship strength orders the paths; it is not the observed indicator movement.

    1. FactA Third Letter for Toleration continues the Proast controversy in print
    2. strengthensDriverProtection of Minority Rights
    3. strengthensIndicators (2)Having a say in government
    Improving path

    impact weight 0.3 · Effect from 1 January 1692 · verified

    A dated third instalment kept coercive-religion arguments under public rebuttal.

    • Having a say in government

      via Protection of Minority Rights

      Better

      Strengthens · Relationship strength 0.14 (weight 0.3 × strength 0.45)

      Observed

      29.8% of population aged 16-65 years · 8.13 below the normal line (2023)

      Worse than normal

      Two readings: 30.2% of population aged 16-65 years (2021) and 29.8% of population aged 16-65 years (2023).

      20212023

      Above normal = better

    • Rule of Law Gap from the Highest Governance Score

      via Protection of Minority Rights

      Better

      Weakens · Relationship strength 0.14 (weight 0.3 × strength 0.45)

      Observed

      43.9 Score · 43.9 above the normal line (2024)

      Worse than normal

      26 readings, 1996–2024: rose from 43 Score to 43.9 Score.

      Normal is zero · any amount = worse

Evidence

The sources behind this fact and its verification state.

Verified2 sources on file
  1. 1.Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy — Locke on TolerationStanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy · High credibility · verified
  2. 2.A Letter Concerning Toleration — public EnglishProject Gutenberg · High credibility · verified
What the sources establish

SEP’s toleration entry and Gutenberg’s Letter cluster independently distinguish the 1692 Third Letter. Official: A Third Letter for Toleration — later public English cluster (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/23772 (opens in a new tab); Project Gutenberg). Independent: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy — Locke on Toleration, Third Letter (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-toleration/ (opens in a new tab); Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy). The two URLs are different pages. Where the carrier is a later edition or a received narrative, that limit is stated rather than upgraded to an autograph. Official carrier: A Third Letter for Toleration — later public English cluster (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/23772 (opens in a new tab); Project Gutenberg). Independent carrier: Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy — Locke on Toleration, Third Letter (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-toleration/ (opens in a new tab); Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy).

Established: a 1692 Third Letter. Not established: that Parliament enacted it, or that 2001 SEP is the letter. Established: a sourced public record of A Third Letter for Toleration continues the Proast controversy in print under 1692-01-01.

Shared responsibility is part of A Third Letter for Toleration continues the Proast controversy in print. Naming John Locke does not delete co-authors, institutions, or later transmitters. The lag from 1692-01-01 to any measured indicator is not treated as zero. Alternative explanations — weather, other armies, later statutes, or independent cultural change — remain live where the sources do not close them.

The contribution type is direct. That reading is an impact-path choice, not a property stored on the Fact itself.

If a number is not in the two records named above, it is not supplied here.

Causal path

How this event connects to drivers and indicators in the graph.

  1. ActorJohn Locke
  2. contributed toFactA Third Letter for Toleration continues the Proast controversy in print
  3. strengthensDriverProtection of Minority Rights
  4. strengthensIndicatorHaving a say in government

Cite this page

Factrail. (2026). A Third Letter for Toleration continues the Proast controversy in print. Factrail. https://factrail.ai/facts/jlk-third-letter-1692

https://factrail.ai/facts/jlk-third-letter-1692

Accessed 16 October 2026.

By the Factrail desk · Method: how we source and score · Last reviewed

Dispute this factNamed here, or represent someone who is? Request a right of reply.