ipl-logo

Comparing Hobbes, Locke, And Rousseau

1528 Words7 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Essay on hobbes, rousseau and locke

1. “State of Nature,” A topic, about which many famous philosophers like Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau, shared their point of view. They basically stated the role of humans and their features related to unity, peace, and freedom. I personally think that state of nature simply means how people managed themselves before all that civilization took over, where no one required government or societies, to provide them a status or an identity or a place where no one required permission to do anything they want.
Hobbes writing regarding “State of Nature,” was mainly about how humans are so offensive and always ready for the war. Humans are always willing to fight with one another to get superior to others. He stated that nature doesn’t make all men …show more content…

As in, his environment makes him lean towards one side or the other. I personally did not like Hobbes’ idea, because he thinks that a person is evil as soon he steps into this world. I did not like Locke’s idea either, because he thinks if our power is given to someone, they can use it against us. I believe in not letting anyone degrade me, which means that I don’t have to give them chance or opportunity to embarrass me. I would do anything it would take to keep my prestige high, but not let anyone be my weakness. I find a hidden meaning in Rousseau’s writing to which I have experienced so far in my life. When someone gets power or someone gets our authority, they misuse us for their own …show more content…

His treatise was manly about religious freedom. He appreciated what King Henry did to give religious freedom to all the religions. His belief was that they should not be punished for having a different belief. He discusses that if we still remind ourselves our parts then there will be wars going on all over the world for having different religions.
After King Louis XIV, who revocated Edict of Nantes, his grandson (or great grandson) whose belief was that it’s not necessary to like all the religions but tolerating them wouldn’t make anyone else lower. He made some really but changes to what his grandfather wished Catholics Romans will still be the majority, but they will have to tolerate other minorities as well, forgetting their past rivalry. Marriages were allowed same as Catholic subjects. (Ironically, the grandsons actually were never satisfied with their grandfather’s

Show More
Related
1721 Words | 7 Pages

While we can read about liberty and the state of nature in Rousseau and, at least implicitly, in Madison, we cannot necessarily determine where these views come from. Why does Rousseau view the state of nature as slavery to one’s instincts? Why does Madison think negative liberties are so important? While a possible explanation could refer to their views about human nature, this explanation is hard to support with Memorial and Remonstrance and On the Social Contract alone. More analysis of Rousseau and Madison’s other works could provide richer context for this particular disagreement, shedding light on the views of two tremendously influential thinkers about politics and

Read More
965 Words | 4 Pages

Do you believe all humans have the best intentions for others? Many people believe that we come into this world with only good inside of us, while others believe we all arrive good but our mindset is turned evil and self-obsessed throughout time as we grow older. In the 17th century there were many arguments on whether citizens should govern themselves or have a ruler to keep the citizens in control. Everyone has a clean slate at the start but the choices one makes can mold you into who you become later on. In the 17th century there were two philosophers, John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, who both thought differently about human nature and the way some people are when it comes to money and power.

Read More
883 Words | 4 Pages

In contrast, Paul Hay du Chastelet, aristocrat and political writer, portrays indignation toward aristocratic leaders who stand for religious toleration. It is evident through document 7 that du Chastelet feared diversity of religion, in which he thought would effect the solidarity of the states. Similarly, King Louis XIV opposed religious toleration and banned all Huguenot worship in France in his Edict of Fontainebleau of 1685, which was also known as the Revocation of the Edict of Nantes. It revoked the Edict of Nantes signed by Henry 1V by putting an end to the freedom of worship in France (Louis XIV 8). The agreement between Charles XII of Sweden and Holy Roman Emporer Joseph I in 1707 supported the idea of religious toleration.

Read More
559 Words | 3 Pages

Although, their views on the type of government and the natural rights of its citizens greatly differed, especially regarding the state of nature. The state of nature is an idea used in political philosophy that was used by Enlightenment philosophers. It’s a representation of human nature without society. Locke believed that “Men living according to reason, without a common superior on earth, to judge between them, is properly the state of nature.”

Read More
442 Words | 2 Pages

Louis was Catholic. He believed that unity between the nations was hard because of the religion diversity. He did enforce the unity of religion and let all people to convert to Catholicism. He terminated the religious freedom of the French Protestant, also known as Huguenots. He controlled over the Catholic Church, and let church obeyed his orders.

Read More
345 Words | 2 Pages

Hobbes vs Locke When a unlawful crime happens we are shocked and paralyzed by fear and despair. Well ,with these crimes comes governmental responsibility this is why. Without a strictly ruled government violence, no productivity, and consequently no knowledge of the Earth would result. To begin, with “Without a common power to keep them in awe, it will result in a state of war” as Thomas Hobbes states. Strict power is important, absences of this allows us to forget that we are all equal and no one is higher than the other.

Read More
1254 Words | 6 Pages

Kaplan, Benjamin J. Divided By Faith: Religious Conflict And The Practice of Toleration in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2007). Benjamin J. Kaplan’s Divided By Faith: Religious Conflict And the Practice of Toleration in Early Modern Europe challenges the traditional view that religious toleration became prevalent in Europe following the Enlightenment. Kaplan is a Professor of Dutch History at the University College London and the University of Amsterdam. The purpose of Divided by Faith is to provide a new outlook on the history of religious tolerance and conflict in early modern Europe. Kaplan illustrates this purpose by diverging from traditional scholarship on toleration in early modern Europe.

Read More
1942 Words | 8 Pages

Humans have come a long way from the Stone Age. We’ve come from an age of using stick and stones as a means to survive to a new age where there’s nuclear power. We’ve created empires and state because humans are social animals who can’t truly be independent. We need each other to survive and we need the expertise and contribution of everyone to make our lives easier as time goes on. Great wise men such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and J.J. Roseau are a few individuals who helped change the way many of us think and helped us a developed a political system to govern us.

Read More
1001 Words | 5 Pages

Hobbes believes our natural condition is extremely dangerous. When humans remain in their natural condition, every man is at war against every other man. Hobbes believes that our natural condition is the state of nature which is the stare of war. In the state of nature, there is no government and therefore no laws. Men are able to do anything they want.

Read More
253 Words | 2 Pages

Human nature is deemed as something natural and what is more natural than the things we are born into this world with? Based on this thought, I find the conception stating that human nature is what is innate the most promising. My belief on how we are innately brought into this world is a mixture of what both Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau believed, however I find more truth behind Thomas Hobbes ideology that we are born “selfish, competitive, and distrustful” (81) in the sense of these traits are expressed first and foremost. This description of humankind may be difficult to digest, however, if we consider the mere fact that we humans are in fact animals that seek survival, it becomes easier. In all animals, the instinct to survive

Read More
1441 Words | 6 Pages

Both social contract philosophers defended different views about moral and political obligations of men living in the state of nature stripped of their social characters. The state of nature illustrates how human beings acted prior to entering into civil society and becoming social beings living under common legitimacy. The state of nature is to be illustrated as a hypothetical device to explain political importance in the society. Thomas Hobbes, propounded politics and morality in his concept of the state

Read More
755 Words | 4 Pages

. . and consequently, among men there ariseth, on that ground, envious and hate, and finally war” (13 6-10 108). These instinctive desires and repetitive behavioral occurrences Hobbes believes that the natural behavior of human beings is troubled, and leads only to a state of outrage and

Read More
1351 Words | 6 Pages

Hobbes holds that “it is impossible to subjugate a man without first having placed him in the position of being unable to do without another.” Thus, the lack of organizational interdependence in primitive society prevents inequality. Similarly, the lawlessness of early society makes conflict impossible: war “can exist neither in the state of nature, where there is no stable property.”

Read More
1740 Words | 7 Pages

This state of nature was the conditions in which we lived before there were any political governments to rule over us and it described what societies would be like if we had no government at all. In this essay I will compare the opinions given by each philosopher regarding their understanding of the state and the law. I will also discuss how their theories have influenced our understanding of the law today. Thomas Hobbes – Regarding the State and Law Firstly I would like to begin my discussion with Thomas Hobbes.

Read More
1443 Words | 6 Pages

Thomas Hobbes and Jacques Rousseau on the state of nature The world is always filled with rigid dichotomies: good and evil, left and right, McDonald’s and Burger King -- just to mention some of them. The political theory in the 17th century seemed to have experienced a similar trend. The nature of government, more specifically the state of men, were often questioned, like the debate between Democrats and Republicans today. In 17th century Europe, the two major viewpoints on the issue were best exemplified by the writings of Thomas Hobbes, and Jacques Rousseau.

Read More

More about Comparing Hobbes, Locke, And Rousseau

Related Topics

Open Document