Comparing Thomas Hobbs And John Locke On The English Civil War

Thomas Hobbs and John Locke were two philosophers that played a crucial role when it came to decide how American government would best succeed. In addition, these two men were firm believers on opposing forms of government due to their observation of human nature. Although opposing, the ideas set forth by both men had reason as well as background as to why they believed their form would serve a better unified people. Hobbs was a man that lived through the terrifying English Civil War which was what shaped his beliefs on various subjects. For instance, he believed that man were selfish creatures, and that without a unifying government, we would be in constant battle with one another, this was expressed by saying "bellum omnium contra omnes." Hobbs believed that if a well-established common power to unite people, war would arise. Moreover, he expressed his ideas by saying that we as humans naturally crave more power and that we will never be truly satisfied. One can say that Hobbs had a somewhat negative view on the nature of humans, in his writings in Leviathan, he expresses his views on human nature and how war is reached due to three reasons, competition, distrust, and glory, hence the views he captured from the English war. He insisted that the state of human nature would be equal to a state of war which would include universal

According to his Essay, he was a man that believed in a state of nature that would be peaceful, people would want to maintain their natural rights and eventually form a social contract to preserve said natural rights. Furthermore, Locke was a believer that our experiences shape our way of thinking, with the events we experience, our mind is capable of examining what is right from wrong. Locke combined religious and philosophical views to portray a more positive view on human