Comparing John Locke's Second Treatise And Thomas Hobbes: The Concepts Of Perfect Society

1291 Words 5 Pages
In John Locke’s Second Treatise and Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan, both authors introduce concepts of perfect societies built upon the initial state of nature for the purpose of ultimately escaping that state to enter a state of civility and peace. The state of nature is one governed by natural laws that each individual understands through their innate sense of reasoning. Hobbes condemns that state because he contends that in the state of nature, there is no property, which propagates fear and death because of a lack of common authority to settle matters on disagreements concerning things like ownership and retributions. Unlike Hobbes, Locke reasons that individuals can actually come into possessions in the state of nature and employs his theory …show more content…
In the Leviathan, Hobbes introduces the state of nature as one locked in fear and uncertainty because the resources that the earth provides are mutually attainable. In this state of nature, Hobbes explains that there is only possession but no ownership because one can only possess an item for as long as their neighbor doesn’t desire the item enough to exact force and take it for themselves. To survive, people acquire many of those resources but without a common authority there is no way to establish a sense of property, or permanent possession. On a common earth, Hobbes reasons that the resources of the earth belong to everyone, therefore no one really has a secure personal right to anything. To escape from that world of uncertainties, Hobbes claims that the contract is the only path towards peace. The contract is an agreement that both parties sacrifice some natural rights towards a common resolution; however, that cannot be sustained without an enforcing body. For example, I cannot kill someone for their bread and they cannot kill me for my bread so that we both enjoy the benefits of security, food, and favor from the common …show more content…
In the state of nature, we fight to survive; therefore, to Locke we must be able to attain property, in other words property is what we are intrinsically devoted to seeking out and applying effort to secure. If an object is worth the energy we lose in the labor we apply, then it is more than plausible to claim that item as property, however easily it can be lost to the efforts of another. Locke identifies that reality and constructs civil society dedicated to preserving that base need for survival. Hobbes loses sight of the natural law for self-preservation by claiming that we cannot truly have property, even in civil society. Locke acknowledges our personal subjectivities because the drive to live is intrinsic to everyone and our labors, which stem from the strain of the bodies we aim to protect, are the only way we can support those lives. A sense of property should of course come naturally; naturally because it is of the state of

Related Documents