Hobbes Vs Locke

Words: 1170
Pages: 5
Open Document
Kimberley Hornaday
1980130
PHIL 330
February 25th, 2016

The condition of man in the state of nature will consistently ever remain an enigma to modern day scholars, for no matter the level of intellect or education, it is a circumstance that cannot be known first hand. Because we as a society strive for an acquired intellect and education, we are thus separated from the state of nature. Any and all analysis of man in the state of nature, therefore, is done hypothetically and from opinion-based observation. Locke and Hobbes share the similarities of approaching this question as theorists of social contract and natural law. They both conclude the state of nature to be defined as a lack of civil government; an environment in which humanity …show more content…
In the natural state, it is rational for man to seek peace and order, but while Locke entrusts man with an inherent knowledge of right and wrong, and the capability to maintain peace and order amongst themselves, Hobbes sees man as inherently evil and corrupt. Viewing man as naturally irrational and incapable of maintaining peace, Hobbes sees the obvious requirement for an absolute sovereign to guide and govern the collected. Without one, society could not exist in peace; this is where Locke disagrees. While he admits evidence of irrationality among men, Locke thinks man is inherently rational and strong in independence. Being capable of knowing what is lawful and unlawful successfully, man is able to resolve conflicts and maintain peace without a governing sovereign. Locke therefore views it as irrational to transfer any power or authority to a sovereign, but it is more effectively argued that Locke’s theory is unsuccessful. My first paragraphs will provide explanation of Locke’s view of man in the state of nature, along with an explanation of the social contract, followed by indication of problems with his thesis. I will then introduce Hobbes’ opposition, and argue for its success. With reference to Locke’s conflict with Hobbes’ argument, I will conclude with Hobbes’ …show more content…
Locke admits a government as a useful method to avoid loss of these natural rights, but still emphasizes the irrationality behind admitting all authority to the governing sovereign. His government is necessarily more liberal than a dictatorship. The commonwealth must actively choose to sign a social contract that gives the sovereign a job to protect primal rights, and they are motivated to do so in order to obtain security and peace. By virtue of a system of democratic law and public say, the sovereign need only to act in accordance with the public’s needs. If the government fails to do so, the common man has the right to leave the commonwealth or to rebel. Locke’s commonwealth government operates under a system of social contract, where people have inherently inalienable rights – liberty, life, and the right to private property – that they may choose to transfer under the protection of a selected sovereign power. However, this transfer could never rationally be whole. For an individual to completely surrender his authority and power to the sovereign would be to create an absolute authoritative sovereign. If this were the case, it is no longer required of the sovereign to act in accordance with the needs of the commonwealth for, by logic, he has no dependence on them. An absolute monarch would thus have the authority to against the public needs, if he so
Show More

Related Documents: Hobbes Vs Locke

Locke Vs Hobbes Essay

European History Locke Vs Hobbes During the 18th centuries, the movement that are known as the “Enlightenment” brought many more idea into play in European society. Two of these contributors are Locke and Hobbes. While they are both natural law theorist and social contract theorist, their similarities ends there. Hobbes supports order and monarch, while Locke liberties and republic. On the matters on governments, Locke and Hobbes have opposite…

Words 667 - Pages 3

Hobbes Vs Locke

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are both very influential theoretical philosophers. They have both shared their ideologies in how the government should operate. Despite their shared commitments in philosophy, Hobbes and Locke have several points of divergence. Hobbes’s ideology is mostly based on a monarchy. In Hobbes’s eyes a monarchy solves conflicts, insures stability, and consistency in policies. While in the other hand Locke believed voluntary dictatorship/ democracy is the best way to govern a…

Words 561 - Pages 3

Hobbes Vs Locke

One of Hobbes’ take-away claims from “Leviathan” is that absolute monarchy is preferable to the State of Nature. Locke, in stating that the State of Nature is superior to absolute monarchy, is in direct opposition to Hobbes’ claim. As such, this explicit and direct opposition to Hobbes’ claim could easily be construed an intentional response to Hobbes. The difference in the claims originates in the difference between each author’s conception of the State of Nature. Where Hobbes imagines the State…

Words 298 - Pages 2

John Locke Vs Hobbes

the investigation of the nature, causes or principles of reality, values or knowledge rooted in a reasoning approach. Moreover, philosophers provide inside into the mysteries of human existence and truth. Two well-known philosophers, John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, do exactly this by discussing elements of the social contract, a theory from the Age of Enlightenment that addresses the nature of man, the origin of society and political authority over man. In Locke’s Two Treaties of Government and A letter…

Words 1803 - Pages 8

John Locke Vs Hobbes Essay

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, they both had completely different views of the ideal state. Each of them supported their own ideas and also considered it correct. And they had their own vision about the ideal state. But what is the state for us, for people, each of us wants to live under sustained, strong state that could protect people from a variety of disasters and accidents. I believe that each of us wants to live in peace, without various kinds of violence and coercion to anything. But not everyone…

Words 497 - Pages 2

Governmental Philsophies: Locke vs. Hobbes Essay

A. Thomas Hobbes 1. Hobbes believed that people were naturally selfish, unsociable human beings. Human beings in general were simple minded, with selfish desires, and were most influenced by their desire for power over others. Hobbes believed that man were addicted to having power, and quarrel amongst people is only natural. Men also live by a “social contract” in which they treat others the way they wish to be treated themselves. Yet this social contract is not substantial enough to maintain order…

Words 819 - Pages 4

Locke Vs. Hobbes: Is Human Nature Good Or Evil?

Is Human Nature good or evil? That’s the question and debate that has been asked for decades and still is to this current day. The most famous debate over this was Locke v. Hobbes. Locke thought people were naturally good, on the other hand Hobbes thought people were naturally evil. I side with Locke and I think that people are naturally good and try to be the best person they can be. 75% of people in the world are good people, but there are those people that are bad, but most of the time those…

Words 380 - Pages 2

How Did John Locke's Influence On Government

The object of this essay is to compare and contrast Thomas Hobbes and John Locke’s ideas in the state of nature and how it has an influence on government. Both Hobbes and Locke write similar when referring to the state of nature, they raise the idea that man can exist without government, but that it comes with risks. Hobbes speaks of the nature itself, while Locke makes examples to prove it. The Leviathan and Second Treatise of Government help explain Hobbes’s and Locke’s ideas and the points they…

Words 1513 - Pages 7

John Locke, And Jean-Jacques Rousseau: Article Analysis

Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean Jacques Rousseau may disagree on which form of supreme power is the most ordered (monarchy vs. democracy), they all claim because an individual’s passions and desires may possibly obstruct the rights of others, some form of government is needed. In order to live successfully, citizens willfully give up their individual freedom for the benefit that a supreme being of power will guarantee their safety and protection through state legislation. The people then can…

Words 606 - Pages 3

Politics: Political Philosophy and John Locke Essay

Hobbes VS. Locke Political Science 2300 Introduction to political thought Dr. G. Michael Stathis, Ph.D. Autumn Semester 2012 Take home essay #3 By, Monte Van Buskirk In this paper I will discussing contrasts, and similarities between Thomas Hobbes, and John Locke. Their views on popular contract/constitution. And many other different parts of their ideas and thoughts that contrast each other completely. I will compare their ideas on things like human nature, the necessary amount…

Words 1504 - Pages 7