ABSTRACT
In a debate over recoinage in the 1690s, John Locke insisted that the value of silver currency should continue to correspond to its value by weight in silver, and that the face value of the coin should never be set at a rate of the government’s choosing. Locke’s economic position in the debate over currency appears to be inconsistent with his view of money as a sign representing commodities. Signs, for Locke, are merely conventional, a product of mutual agreement. Thus, we might expect the value of currency to be renegotiable, subject to change. This creates a tension in Locke’s position. I attempt to resolve the tension by appealing to another feature of his theory, the strategy of ‘rectification,’ which plays an important role in his theory of language.
