The description of the state of nature is only a prelude to political theories concerning the ideal political system for humans to live in. On one hand, Rousseau depicted natural man as solitary and peaceful as he illustrated how man is tainted as he becomes societal via the process of moving into society. To him, society is the corrupting force that transforms ‘natural man’ into the self-obsessed beast that Hobbes declares he is. He does not deny Hobbes’ concept of state of nature but declares it incorrect and gives it his own significant meaning. For Rousseau, reverting back to the state of nature is much more than the removal of government or authority. It is the removal of all cultural clothes including beliefs, language and even an understanding of ourselves. At this level of development Rousseau believed that self-love and pity are the only sentiments that remain in our nature. As equality ensues, thirst for power is quenched as there is no one left to have power over. 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
The description of the state of nature is only a prelude to political theories concerning the ideal political system for humans to live in. On one hand, Rousseau depicted natural man as solitary and peaceful as he illustrated how man is tainted as he becomes societal via the process of moving into society. To him, society is the corrupting force that transforms ‘natural man’ into the self-obsessed beast that Hobbes declares he is. He does not deny Hobbes’ concept of state of nature but declares it incorrect and gives it his own significant meaning. For Rousseau, reverting back to the state of nature is much more than the removal of government or authority. It is the removal of all cultural clothes including beliefs, language and even an understanding of ourselves. At this level of development Rousseau believed that self-love and pity are the only sentiments that remain in our nature. As equality ensues, thirst for power is quenched as there is no one left to have power over. 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