The State of Human Nature
There is no other beast in this world, which has argued more over who is right. In our
world, we amounted to heights of intelligence that have changed us from the levels of animal’s
hierarchy. We’ve created ideas to create reason, civilizations for people to live together, and
governments to establish rules to guide those civilizations. Some people believe that with the
development of civilization, it had evolved us from a primitive side of our human nature, into a
more sophisticated and civilized manner. However, there are those who still believe in that
civilization has constrained man from his true nature, that we are noble savages. Although this
debate if humans are good or bad is a never-ending question, one can agree …show more content…
However, Hobbes sees that it is set as the best form of self-
protection, otherwise man would not be able to survive and be happy within his life.
From my viewpoint, Hobbes theory of man’s natural state, is seen to be the most credible
and realistic outcome. Hobbes comprehend that man needs a political society to maintain a sense
of humanity, while Rousseau still remains lacking insufficient terms of comprehend how man
could consent to shifting to the formation of political society.
Hobbes depicts that the need for a social contract would provide self-preservation or self-
protection, without any social contract, man could not have any chance of survival. Man must be
able to possess a sense or idea of peace and order, which social contract relies on. In a social
contract, man must be able to sacrifice all of his rights and transfers them to for complete safety.
Though Hobbes views the state of nature as an approach from the phases that man has undergone
from his natural state to a civilized society, I can agree with Rousseau’s perspective that capacity
of man and expectations from life has create inequality. Man is never be equal to his fellow
There is no other beast in this world, which has argued more over who is right. In our
world, we amounted to heights of intelligence that have changed us from the levels of animal’s
hierarchy. We’ve created ideas to create reason, civilizations for people to live together, and
governments to establish rules to guide those civilizations. Some people believe that with the
development of civilization, it had evolved us from a primitive side of our human nature, into a
more sophisticated and civilized manner. However, there are those who still believe in that
civilization has constrained man from his true nature, that we are noble savages. Although this
debate if humans are good or bad is a never-ending question, one can agree …show more content…
However, Hobbes sees that it is set as the best form of self-
protection, otherwise man would not be able to survive and be happy within his life.
From my viewpoint, Hobbes theory of man’s natural state, is seen to be the most credible
and realistic outcome. Hobbes comprehend that man needs a political society to maintain a sense
of humanity, while Rousseau still remains lacking insufficient terms of comprehend how man
could consent to shifting to the formation of political society.
Hobbes depicts that the need for a social contract would provide self-preservation or self-
protection, without any social contract, man could not have any chance of survival. Man must be
able to possess a sense or idea of peace and order, which social contract relies on. In a social
contract, man must be able to sacrifice all of his rights and transfers them to for complete safety.
Though Hobbes views the state of nature as an approach from the phases that man has undergone
from his natural state to a civilized society, I can agree with Rousseau’s perspective that capacity
of man and expectations from life has create inequality. Man is never be equal to his fellow