Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
John locke’s view of government
John locke’s view of government
John Locke, Political Essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
More handpicked essays just for you.
John locke’s view of government
John locke’s view of government
John Locke, Political Essays
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Hobbes believes that you must give up some of your rights to be protected by the government, and the best form of government is absolute monarchy. Contrasting Hobbes's philosophy , John Locke believes that all people are equal, and deserve the rights to life, liberty and property. Locke also believes that the best form of government is representative of the people. Similar to Hobbes's and antithesis Locke’s ideas, Jean-Jacque Rousseau believes that people are unequal in general.
John Locke and Thomas Hobbes were early English philosophers who each had very different views on the roles of the government and the people being governed. Their interpretations of human nature each had a lasting and vast impact on modern political science. Locke believed that men had the right to revolt against oppressive government. “‘Being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions.”
Hobbes’s opinions about politics and government were far different from fellow English philosopher John Locke’s in his document Second Treatise of Government published in 1689. Locke existed during a much later period in Europe, when the Wars of Religion was over and England had established the Glorious Revolution Agreement between Dutch nobility, William and Mary, and Parliament. Due to the different time periods in which Hobbes and Locke lived, their experiences had a major effect on their opinions about government. Hobbes’ Leviathan and Locke’s Second Treatise of Government had different opinions regarding a man’s state of nature and social contract.
“In 1651, Hobbes wrote one of the most influential philosophical treatises in human history, Leviathan or the Matter Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil. Like his rival, John Locke, Hobbes posited that in a state of nature men and women were free to pursue and defend their own interests, which resulted in a state of war in which “the life of man” was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short. ”(“Philosopher who influenced the Founding Fathers and the First Principles,”
Both writers describe man as being intrinsically equal in this state, with Hobbes stating that “nature hath made men so equall, in the faculties of body, and mind…. the difference between man, and man, is not so considerable” (183). In a similar fashion, in his Two Treatises of Government, Locke depicts the state of nature as, “a state also of Equality, whererin all the Power and Jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another…” (269). Regardless, however, both men describe the danger of living in this crude condition, perhaps due to this very equality that exists. In the eyes of Hobbes, the state of nature is the equivalent of a state of war, building on the premise that, “if any two men desire the same thin, which neverthelesse they cannot both enjoy, they become enemies” (158).
Hobbes believed that natural state of humans was violent and therefore needed order and control to ensure a just and equal society (Robinson 2016, 4). However Hobbes believed that a sovereign could maintain power without deceit and manipulation. Hobbes believed in the social contract which is when people could have a moral understanding about right and wrong to avoid the chaotic violent human nature. Hobbes believed in the idea of utilitarianism which would “maximize the most good and minimize the pain” (Robinson 201, 4). This would ensure that the sovereign was doing things for the right reasons and not to better himself but to better society as a
Many people argue over if the government should be run like Hobbes states with a version of an unlimited government, or as Locke states with a government that is more limited. Government should be run as Hobbes argues, because without government people will become enemies and go to war, man won’t be treated equally, and people won’t be able to have a society. To begin with, without Unlimited Government people will become enemies with each other. This is shown when Hobbes states,”... If any two men desire the same thing, which nevertheless they cannot both enjoy they become enemies…”
As we know Hobbes agreed totally in absolute monarchy. He even said that the purpose of the government was to impose the law and order to prevent the state of war. Also, he believed that a government headed by a king was the best form that a society could take. That if we placed all power in the hands of the king would mean more resolute and consistent exercise of political authority, he said. In the other hand Locke said that the purpose of a government should be to secure natural rights, namely man property and liberty.
According to Hobbes, a sovereign, whether the sovereign was placed into power by violence or force, is the only way to secure law and order. For him, if a citizen obeys the sovereign for fear of punishment or in the fear of the state of nature, it is the choice of the citizen. According to Hobbes, this is not tyranny; it is his idea of a society that is successful, one that does not have room for democracy. As a realist, Hobbes has a fierce distrust of democracy and viewed all of mankind in a restless desire for power. If the people are given power, law and order would crumble in Hobbes’ eyes.
In London in 1651, Thomas Hobbes published Leviathan, a book in which he asserts that absolutism is the only way to maintain societal order and avoid “the war of all against all” (Hobbes). Absolutism, most commonly associated with Louis XIV, is the unlimited authority of a single leader, meaning a sole individual has the power to make all decisions. Hobbes includes two key terms, warre and power, when supporting his argument for absolutism. Although both terms are simple and self-explanatory, I believe their context greatly contributes to why he so strongly advocates for this form of government. When describing warre, Hobbes states, “Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time of Warre, where every man is Enemy to every man” (Hobbes 89).
His ideas contrasted with Locke’s though because he believed in a strong government and absolute monarchy. Hobbes opposed Locke and said his idea would create chaos, because people are naturally selfish and greedy. Thomas believed that a strong government was needed to enforce order in society. In Hobbes “social contract”, people sacrifice their freedom for the greater good to have a better society.
When comparing the two different accounts of English philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke we must take into consideration a number of things such as the age in which they lived and the time in which they produced their philosophical writings. We will however find out that these two philosophers actually have a couple of things in which agree on even though most of their opinions clash. On one side we have Thomas Hobbes who lived in the time of the English Civil War (1642-1651) who provides a negative framework for his philosophical opinions in his masterpiece Leviathan and who advocates for philosophical absolutism . On the other side we have John Locke, living during the glorious revolution (1688-1689) he presents a positive attitude in his book The Second Treatise of Government and advocates for philosophical and biblical constitutionalism. It is important that we know that the state of nature describes a pre- political society prior to the social contract.
He wrote many things that inspired the Constitution, including the belief that all people are born with certain inalienable rights like life, liberty, and right to own property, “every man has a property in his own person…the labor of his body and hands are properly his” (71). Unlike Hobbes, Locke believed people were not inherently evil, they could govern themselves, and did not need a sovereign power. Locke also had a different idea of what the state of nature was. He believed that it was a world of perfect liberty in which citizens can conduct their own lives as they see fit, “the state of nature has a law of nature to govern it which obliges everyone”; the state of nature was not a world of chaos and all-out war, as Hobbes would suggest (69). Hobbes believed that the only way to prevent the war against man was to create a strong government with absolute power that focused on keeping people in line.
While Hobbes also states that the human nature does not allow for the people to live in peace and to pursue common goals since “here are very many that think themselves wiser and abler to govern the public better than the rest” (Hobbes 3). respectively, there always exists the notion of competition, and if there is no possibility to reach consensus over the issue, there is the need for establishing an authority. This is the reflection of the social contract idea in the work by Hobbes as far as the author is concerned that only through common action and goals the society is able to function without problems and conflicts. Nevertheless, even though, in contrast to Machiavelli, Hobbes suggests the way of getting power that is based on agreement rather than on power and intellectual games, their ideas regarding the need for a strong ruler who would be able to establish the order in the society is rather similar, even though in one case this task is taken by a person himself and in the other case delivered by the
Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau have become known as three of the most prominent political theorists in the world today. Their philosophies and innovative thinking is known worldwide and it has influenced the creation of numerous new governments. All three thinkers agree on the idea of a social contract but their opinions differ on how the social contract is established and implemented within each society. These philosophers state, that in order for the social contract to be successful people need to give up certain freedoms in order to secure fundamental protections from the state, henceforth the state then has certain responsibilities to their citizens. Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau all believe that before men were governed we all lived in a state of nature.