Thomas Hobbes And John Locke

1008 Words5 Pages

Thomas Hobbes book Leviathan essentially depicts his view on what Hobbes believes on how society should be. Leviathan, which is described in his writings as a large person where the body is made up of the individuals within society and the head of the person is made of the king. Essentially, Hobbes views on humanity were not the greatest. Remember, his view on state of nature was that "mankind was inherently violent”. With growing up having to live in fear all his life with political anarchy going on around him and with the belief that people would always live in discourse with one another. Therefore, Hobbes theory of the social contract was in the favor of absolute sovereignty. Meaning that the King/Queen would be the head of society and the …show more content…

In his book The Two Treatises of Government Locke is arguing against Robert Filmer’s ideology that men are not naturally free . This same ideology can be referenced to Hobbes ideal of absolute sovereignty. Locke believes that men are born with reason and therefore it is not possible to be born underneath the rule of King because people are able to govern themselves. This is a view where Hobbes and Locke differentiate on how people should be governed. Locke’s view on the state of nature is that all born men are equal this would disagree with royalist who believed that the monarchy should still be in placed. Another view point within the book stated was that men had the ability to overthrow a government if they had been wronged. Another idea Hobbes and Locke differentiated on while Hobbes believed that once society had chosen a ruler they had a social contract while Locke believed that if the ruler infringed on life liberty or property the people had a right rid themselves of their government. Locke refers to this as “State of War” an example of this occurs when Charles I refused to call parliament, raised taxes upon his people and many believed that he was a secret Catholic (the protestants feared the Catholics and didn’t want their king to be one). When Charles refused to call parliament he obviously couldn’t be granted any money therefore imposed taxes in which ultimately in the end angered everyone. The downside of not listening to his people caused a dis-connect within the King, Parliament and the people. Within this situation Locke would say it was only right to try Charles with treason because the king was not protecting his people and their commonwealth. While Hobbes in the end would disagree I agree that the people in that time not only favored a monarch but also needed

Open Document