同意論是洛克建構其國家理論的重要基礎。同意論的確立，標誌出政治思想史上自由與民主理論發展的關鍵時刻，然而該學說長久以來引發諸多學術論辯，且使人質疑洛克的早晚期立場是否相容。本文考察洛克的國家理論中「同意」此一概念所扮演的角色，以此參與當前的學術爭論。本文反對一些具有反歷史傾向的詮釋，即政治審議與自願性意圖構成人們表示同意的基本條件。本文亦駁斥如某些學者所言，同意論為洛克統治正當性的論證提供了一個道德基礎，抑或同意論直接合理化人們的政治義務等觀點。本文將論證，同意論就規範性而言，彰顯了自由是洛克國家理論中最重要的政治價值；就歷史而言，則是回應英格蘭當時政治現實的利器；洛克的表述方式亦揭示了他畢生所擔憂之課題――無政府狀態的危險。因此同意應被視作一項動態的過程，其中人們認可政府統治之必要，同時亦讓統治者承認人們欲維持自由之決心。

John Locke’s theory of state is heavily constructed around his doctrine of consent. The doctrine indeed signifies a critical moment in the development of liberal and democratic theories in the history of political thought. Nevertheless, the doctrine has provoked various controversies and raises doubts on whether Locke’s early and later positions are reconcilable. This paper joins the scholarly debate through investigating the role of consent in Locke’s theory of state. It rejects the ahistorical readings of the doctrine that deliberation and voluntary intention constitute the necessary condition of consent. It also opposes the view that the doctrine of consent offers a moral ground for Locke’s argument on the legitimacy of government, nor does the doctrine directly makes the case for political obligation. Instead, I argue that the doctrine of consent normatively proclaims the essential value of liberty in Locke’s theory of state while historically it was employed as a response to England’s political reality. Locke’s articulation of the doctrine also reveals his life-long concern about the peril of anarchy. Thus, consent should be understood as a dynamic process of recognising the necessity of government while acknowledging the people’s resolution to be free.