ipl-logo

Comparing Thomas Hobbes And John Locke

1045 Words5 Pages

The renowned modern philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, revolutionized the understanding of political philosophy through their interpretation of the state of nature. They compiled their arguments through a position that was relative to their individual thoughts, societal position, and struggle. They looked to express the transition of man, preceding the structure of society more commonly known as the State. Thus, by constructing a comparative analysis on the state of nature respectively for each of the author's interpretation provides the reader invaluable knowledge regarding the structure of modern political thought.
Thomas Hobbes formulates his treatise on the state of nature through negative connotations since the state of being is forever at war, which represses man. The use of knowledge and physical strength are two attributes that Hobbes identifies, and that he argues provides man with success on an individual level within the state of nature. The state of nature is designed in the context that all men are …show more content…

The consent of men creates the general will; therefore, natural rights provide justice and peace for the state. The act of man sacrificing individual rights over the benefit of shared consent presents legitimacy in organizing a civil government. Civil government, to survive, requires man to transfer his rights to the government. The lack of established law and impartial judges, and the authority to punish a violator, are the needs of the state of nature. Men will leave the state of nature to maintain what they possess if those three conditions are not met. Thomas Hobbes requires established authority only to end a potential state of injustice. This latest authority received the impartial justice that was lacking in the natural state. Therefore, the state is not conclusively certain because the three conditions of the state of nature and not to continue beyond the public

Show More
Related
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
1208 Words | 5 Pages

Hobbes believed that man must escape their state of nature to be protected. Within this social contract the ruler had absolute power over the people which lead to their words and opinions never being heard. Hobbes believed that for the government to function properly, the people must obey the absolute monarchy and accept that their opinions are not being accounted. Hobbes explained, “And therefore, they that are subjects to a Monarch, cannot without his leave cast off Monarchy, and return to the confusion of a disunited Multitude; not tranferre their Person from him that beareth it…” (Hobbes in Perry, 22).

Read More
281 Words | 2 Pages

The social contract theory comes to effect when individuals are keen on leaving the state of nature, which entails a time of chaos and lawlessness. Hobbes views this state of nature as states of war where there are individuals constantly seeking to destroy each other in the constant quest for power. Whilst Hobbes believes that life in this state of nature is “nasty, brutish, and short,” Locke holds a more optimistic view of the state of nature. In Locke’s view of the state of nature, all men are free “to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of

Read More
1602 Words | 7 Pages

With the creation of what Hobbes refers to as “state of nature”, Hobbes alters his philosophical content into an odd cross blend of genres, in order to portray the innate and natural state of humankind and its anecdotal perspectives is the result of abstract creativity. A story commences to rise within Leviathan, a tragedy whose fundamental characters are common men battling for survival against the savagery of the innate world and the misuse of each other. Hobbes ' depiction of the contingency of nature resembles his portrayal of what he refers to as “motion of matter”(pg.99). Hobbesian text bodies steadily and fiercely into one another similarly to the way that human bodies clash with state of nature. In this manner, not only does every layer of Hobbes ' contentions expand upon the rationale of the last, every layer reflects previous symbolism and

Read More
1863 Words | 8 Pages

Following the barbarity of the war, Hobbes and Locke developed opposing views on human nature. And while they both agreed on the existence of a social contract, they disagreed on what this contract entailed. As a consequence, they advocated for drastically different types of government, raising the question as to which theory of human nature and proper governance is better suited for the real world. While both theories each have merit, in this essay I will demonstrate that

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
1815 Words | 8 Pages

Hobbes’ approach hinges on this understanding. “[R]eason

Read More
1437 Words | 6 Pages

Hobbes viewed state of nature as a state of war. According to Hobbes, in a state of nature, there is no right to property because no one affords another that right. He stated that property and possessions would inevitably cause men to become enemies. Hobbes believes that people have equal physical and mental ability to harm, and that people will do so for three reasons - competition, difference, and glory. " so that in the state of nature of man, we find three principal causes of quarrel, first, competition; secondly, difference; thirdly, glory" (Hobbes 2008, p.85).

Read More
1723 Words | 7 Pages

Hobbes famously described non-political society, or as it has also been come to known, the State of Nature as “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Hobbes, 1651: 1.13). To understand this it is important to grasp the nature of man in the State of Nature. A concept central to the comprehension of this is the equality of all men; despite having different strengths, men are equal, meaning no man has superiority over another. Man’s dominant passion is described as being self-preservation, all man’s wants, and desires lead back to their want to preserve their lives. Hobbes saw this not only as a passion but a right, all men are born with the natural right to do what they need in order to preserve their own life which Hobbes calls ‘the right of nature’.

Read More
340 Words | 2 Pages

The works of the philosophers Thomas Hobbes and Jean- Jacques Rousseau have continued to rival each even though they were never alive during the same period of time. Thomas Hobbes and Jean- Jacques Rousseau both have conflicting views on “Human Nature”. Rousseau being the younger of the two analyzed Hobbes’ work and seemed to deduce the almost opposite of what Hobbes had believed himself. There have been many debates and arguments throughout time that has given valid arguments for both sides to be correct and even points from both that form an appealing ideal to some. Regardless of the opposition of beliefs, the two have a place etched in history as two of the most influential writers and thinkers ever.

Read More
1354 Words | 6 Pages

In the state of nature Hobbes describes a condition in which mankind is completely free. He claims everyone would have the right to anything. There are no duties binding people and no one would have any obligations. In this environment everyone is a judge of good and evil, there would be neither set rules nor guidelines. With these rights in place Hobbes deems it could only result in such bloody chaos.

Read More
291 Words | 2 Pages

​The natural rights theory was a subject that was discussed by both Hobbes and Locke and it entailed certain natural rights that people are entitled to without government intervention. A state of nature is a condition which is rarely seen today, but nevertheless, represents a place where government does not exist. Because of Hobbes’ connections to the noble families in England, he was able to acquire a unique perspective on the role of government and the role it should play over its ruling citizens. In his view, the natural state of nature is a condition of chaos and should be brought back to order through proper government by means of which the implementation of equal rights can be granted to all people.

Read More
1622 Words | 7 Pages

The State – is a great and mighty power, a kind of “Mortal God” reigns supreme over people and towering above them. Naturally, creating his philosophy, Hobbes did not assume that the components of his theory will have a big socio-political impact on our society and for instance will be used for the purpose of US global domination. It is quite obvious that the ideologists of absolutism in the US, deriving their knowledge, including the doctrine of Hobbes, distribute power and interest “of American sovereign” in many regions of the world. Such rights are

Read More
1351 Words | 6 Pages

Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Thomas Hobbes, two titans of the Enlightenment, work within similar intellectual frameworks in their seminal writings. Hobbes, in Leviathan, postulates a “state of nature” before society developed, using it as a tool to analyze the emergence of governing institutions. Rousseau borrows this conceit in Discourse on Inequality, tracing the development of man from a primitive state to modern society. Hobbes contends that man is equal in conflict during the state of nature and then remains equal under government due to the ruler’s monopoly on authority. Rousseau, meanwhile, believes that man is equal in harmony in the state of nature and then unequal in developed society.

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

More about Comparing Thomas Hobbes And John Locke

Related Topics

Open Document