Compare And Contrast Hobbes Locke And Rousseau

Great Essays
Many people specifically philosophers would question, “Why we need a state?” or “What kind of state should we have?” This question opened up all the different views and perspective of the three following philosophers, Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau. They all have different but also very similar views on the state of nature, social contract, laws. Hobbes definition of state of nature is a state of war. Morality doesn’t exists and everyone lives in constant fear. A reason why people aren’t free is because of fear. There is a saying in Hobbes philosophy which said, “Even the ‘weakest’ could kill the ‘strongest’ men are equal.” Locke believed in state of nature, men exist in complete freedom. Men are free to do whatever they desire. The state of nature …show more content…
Hobbes cared about maximizing liberty, defining social justice, and knowing how to divide the limits of the government power. The process of the state of nature is formed by a community and a government. People would view him as a “Psychological egoist” he was over the top with an unrealistic view of human nature. In the laws of nature and the social contract, “Hobbes thinks the state of nature is something we ought to avoid, at any cost except our own self presentation” (Thomas Hobbes). Hobbes believed in a social contract and how it would help the government rule the society. “He accomplished this by depicting the state of nature in horrible terms as a war of all against all, in which life is ‘solitary poor, nasty, brutish short’” (Leviathan, Chapter 13). Hobbes argues that, in order to get rid of the injustice, people had to give their full consent by giving up all their rights to the government so that the government can have full rights over the state of nature. It was set up to make people believe you are doing what is better to keep you in power. The beginning of state of nature meaning war. Hobbes wants the society to work together meaning giving some rights up in exchange for protection. “This equality of ability produces equality of hope for the attaining of our goals” (Thomas Hobbes). For example, if two people want something they both can’t enjoy or use then they quickly become enemies. Hobbes view, “A law of nature is a command or general rule, discovered by reason, which forbids a man to do anything that is destructive of his life or takes away his means for preserving his life, and forbids him to omit anything by which he thinks his life can best be preserved” (Leviathan, Chapter 14). Those who debate this subject often mistake right and law to be the same yet they ought to be distinguished. A right is the liberty

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    That is why it is necessary to have a commonwealth, or sovereign authority to force people to uphold the contract. By operating through fear and threat of punishment, it mandates the people to adhere to the social contract. Without it, the desires and passions of men in the natural condition will lead them to obtain such passions through violence. The “actions that proceed from those passions” will only continue unless “they know a law that forbids them” (77). They will continue to do as they please because they do not have consequences to impede their actions.…

    • 1634 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    He was of the opinion that people are born with rights, which they then resign to the sovereign in return of protections, this was known as a social contract. He thought that men were selfish and cruel and only acted in their own self-interests. He did not think that men could be trusted to rule themselves and that an absolute ruler was necessary to maintain civil societal order; the purpose of government was to uphold justice, law, and order. For Locke, he was more in favor of a democratic form of government. Locke believed that individuals were born with certain unalienable rights (life, liberty, and the right to property).…

    • 1322 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Due to the conditions of the state of nature, man will consent to this power, as all human’s desire self-preservation, thus making an all powerful sovereign the proper solution. In conclusion, after explaining how humanity act in the state of nature, it is evident that a leviathan is needed in order to create justness and harmony throughout society. When one agrees with life in the state of nature, they must also agree that a powerful sovereign is needed. The violence and fear that the state of nature induces, is detrimental to humanity and thus require a higher power that can create peace. A sovereign is the only plausible solution, as humans are naturally self-preserving and will…

    • 1240 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    His theory that common security should be favored and that a bit of individual liberty should be sacrificed by each person to achieve it is an inaccurate policy. Hobbes believes the contract is a mutual transferring of rights. Individuals should not give up their natural rights because we are all born into a civil society with laws and contacts in place and if we abide by all laws within a civil society we would not be forced to give up our…

    • 908 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s theories, the state of nature is pre-political. It aims to explain the origin of the political order and the legitimacy of human society. Men in Locke’s theory give up their perfect freedom in the state of nature to secure the advantages of civilized society (Locke 495). The role of the government then is to protect the natural rights of all namely man’s property and liberty (Locke 493). According to Rousseau, men in their natural state have equality and liberty but they lose these when they enter the civil society.…

    • 1503 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    The social contract was then put in place to secure man’s need for protection. Hobbes believed that the social contract was a “compact between the subject to obey the sovereign” (Montmorency 53). The problem with Hobbes’ theory starts with his belief that all humans are inherently selfish. He believes that people only work for their best interests, however, he also says that they have the rational capacity to create the best means to the end they want (Friend). He argues that man would choose to give up all of their natural rights because they believe that it is their best option for self-preservation.…

    • 1276 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Orwell’s classic, 1984, exemplifies the graveness of preserving humanity as “that was above all [Winston] wanted to hear. Not merely the love of one person, but the animal instinct, the simple undifferentiated desire; that was the force that would tear the Party to pieces” (Orwell 126). Humanity in society keeps the people in control of their own actions as they are guided by instinct and impulse. Without humanity, all people are controlled by the Party just as if they are drones. Winston Smith sees the necessity in keeping humanity afloat due to his belief that nature should rule people, and this is why he decides to diverge from society.…

    • 655 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Now from the intention to the actual formation of a Commonwealth is a question about the laws of nature: What is the law of nature according to Hobbes and why is it rational to follow it? To sum up the laws of nature: self-preservation is assumed to be naturally good and thus it is good to follow it. From this, there are multiple laws of nature: the law of nature stems from the right of nature to always preserve oneself, and thus the law of nature suggests that a man is forbidden to do anything destructive to himself. The second law states that man will relinquish rights (with a contract) in order to gain peace, thirdly, they are obliged to the contract bound unless their life is in danger. So, for the sake of self-preservation, we seek peace, and if one cannot obtain peace they can do whatever needed (even using the state of war as an advantage, violence included).…

    • 1573 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    However, he believed that they could be a difficulty in using the idea of a state of nature because those who employ it project characteristics found only in society upon men in their original condition. As a result of this, the state of nature was simply a hypothesis to him. He went ahead to dismiss Hobbes idea that men were self-seeking and competitive by nature and in the absence of goodness in the state of nature men are naturally evil. Rousseau notes that one of the main problems humans face is that although they want to be free, they also want the advantages of living in society because it is only as a citizen that man can fulfil…

    • 1059 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Hence, essentially his political theory aimed to recapture as much primeval natural purity as possible, through the new contract described in his book, “The Social Contract” whereby man is free again. Hobbes’ description of humans in the state of nature as ruthless, disorganized savages was an analytical tool used so people would consent to absolute political authority as the only way to avoid chaos such as that in the state of nature. During the early modern periods when Hobbes lived, claims according to which political power originated from a divine or predetermined condition were accompanied by limitations on political rights of people. Hobbes was original, in that he used his argument in support of such ruling families by urging people that some liberty has to be given up and hence vouching for absolute…

    • 1051 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays