Hobbes Vs Rousseau Human Nature

The theory of human nature or the state of nature as described by both Hobbes and Rousseau has been a philosophy that has been in constant question since the 17th century. Both Hobbes and Rousseau wrote on this topic a century a part from another and had similar yet distinct ideas in regards to the state of nature and the need for government or social contract. Hobbes ideology portrays man in a harsh and most depressing manner; his views are seen as cynical and pessimistic. Rousseau’s representation is seen as the opposite, he represents man in an almost idealistic way. Even though Hobbes and Rousseau present differing opinions on the state of man, each thinker offers a framework by which man is governed and why is necessary for him to be …show more content…
He believed man in a state of nature were both free and equal. Though he referred to man as “Noble Savages” he believed there was no reason for man to be selfish and evil in a state of nature because they did not have to worry about anything but natural differences. There was nothing culturally, materially, economically, or politically different to cause a rift in society. However what man was lacking in state of nature was a sense of morality. "However we have no moral liberty in the state of nature, because we have not yet developed a moral sense. This moral sense can only be born in society, and we need to establish a society in which, not only do we preserve the liberty of the state of nature, but also provide the conditions for us to achieve moral freedom" (The Social Contract). Thus to remedy this problem man enters in a social contract. Rousseau makes it clear that the creation of the state is created in accordance with the general will and is there solely for the protection of individual liberty. The power of the sovereign is derived from the general will and it is for this reason that is indivisible, inalienable and …show more content…
These political ideologies have been around since the 17TH century and have simply been manipulated to fit a particular time and place. They’ve been adapted to fit different political institutions and have been used to determine the essence of man and how he functions on a global scale. Both Hobbes and Rousseau used the state of nature to describe why government and sovereignty were needed for the greater good though both authors have their merits and flaws their respective works have created a series of dialogues on man and the state of nature that are still relevant