Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau's State Of Nature

Good Essays
Final Assignment
Richard Herbert
Rowan University

¬
Philosophy and Society
PHIL 09241
A.Jacob Greenstine
October 30, 2017

In political theory the State of Nature is a hypothetical state that human beings lived in before they began to form governments. Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and John Locke, used the state of nature to theorize about the motives that led humans to create government structures and what those government structures should be. Of the three, Locke’s concept of the state of nature is the most realistic and most capable of creating good government.
Hobbes states, that existence in the state of nature is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” (Hobbes) a constant state of competition in which each individual
…show more content…
Mankind may still return to the state of nature if the power of the state collapses. Hobbes believed that if the power of the state is absolute, its collapse is very unlikely and only occurs when the state is no longer able to protect its people.
Rousseau disagreed with Hobbes’s conception of the state of nature. Rousseau’s state of nature is a, peaceful and morally neutral state were solitary live as “Noble Savages” (Rousseau) individuals act according to their basic urges, hunger etc., and their need for self-preservation. These urges and needs are tempered by a natural sense of compassion.
Rousseau believed that the state of nature was a primitive state that preceded the creation of society and that it was only when people left the state of nature and began living together in society that they began living lives that resembled Hobbes’s description of the state of nature, “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and
…show more content…
Humans developed government to impose law and order and control the state of war between individuals. Hobbes government is designed to control people in order to protect them from themselves.
Rousseau believed the state of nature was idyllic and that humans lived freely as equals the negative aspects of human behavior were created by government structures not solved by them. People need to return to the state of nature and have no permanent government institutions. Government functions should be performed by all of the people, not by representatives, as necessary to meet specific needs.
Lockes’ state of nature has both the good and bad aspects of Hobbes and Rousseau. People had complete freedom to do as they wanted, as Rousseau believed, but exercising that freedom sometimes created conflict between people as Hobbes believed. Locke believed that people create governments to protect the rights of all the people without unnecessarily restricting the rights of individuals.
Lockes’ view is more accurate because humans do have the flaws of Hobbes and the aspirations of Rousseau. The governmental structure that Locke developed from his concept of the state of nature balances Rousseau’s complete freedom with Hobbes’s potentially oppressive

Related Documents

  • Decent Essays

    For the “General Will” to be a functional society, every member has to obey it and him or herself. Unlike the “Will of All’, the “General Will” is never wrong, and it is impartial. The “Will of All” is not the will of the majority; it is the sum of the private interest in society. It also is not unanimous, and could be bad for society since it reflects private will, and private will could be wrong. Rousseau’s Social Contract is one that requires all citizen’s to give up their right for the good of the whole, yet it is the citizen’s who control the government, because they are…

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    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.…

    • 1796 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Jean-Jacques Roussseau who was born in Geneva in 1712 is seen as the philosopher of liberty both spiritual and ethical. He saw the human world as a product of human intelligence. He generally believed that human beings were born good but the evils in society quickly corrupted them. Evils such as power politics, insecurity and immorality were all human creations and could simply be overcome by human will. Despite all the negativity created by humans, Rousseau still strongly believed that any evil could be redeemed through the reconstitution of the state on ethical principles (Boucher& Kelly, 2009).…

    • 1059 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    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.…

    • 1051 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    To maintain and control power, those who possess authority must make decisions in unity with society to prevent power from corrupting society. Thomas Hobbes believes in the state of nature, a condition where there is no civil authority. Hobbes also has the theory of absolutism, which is the idea the sovereign has absolute power over society which cannot be challenged by the citizens. Using Andrew Bailey’s First Philosophy: Second Edition I will explain Hobbes’ ideas of both the state of nature and absolutism. I will argue that it is possible to agree with Hobbes about what life is like in the state of nature while disagreeing with him about the all-powerful sovereign?…

    • 1491 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Hobbes believes that without a ruler society will live in the State of Nature. This to Hobbes meant living in an almost civil war like society. Locke believed that in the state of nature people were good and honest, conflicts were resolved peacefully and justly. Locke believed that peace should be the status quo, and we can remain living this way as long as we respect each other. Hobbes believed that people can only live in peace when they turn over all rights to a sovereign.…

    • 1195 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    He disagreed with the idea of an absolute monarchy, but instead said that limited power was more effective. With that being said, it is society’s right to overthrow the government whenever they have evidence to do so. Locke’s idea of a social contract was very different than Hobbes’. According to Locke, life in the state of nature was filled with “peace, goodwill, mutual assistance, and preservation.” Locke strongly believed that because people were naturally moral, in a social contract, no competition or harm would be an issue. He thought that without a government to defend the people against those wanting to take advantage of them, soon fear would take over.…

    • 909 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Locke promotes more of an optimistic viewpoint arguing that the best form of government is a democracy. All people are born with rights and liberty and can be trusted to govern a society themselves and must ban together and create a working society. Where as Hobbes believes that people need to be restrained, Locke promotes that the point of a government is to serve as a third party for any issues, but not dictate. Unlike an absolute monarch, a democracy has very little power over its citizens. It stands on rules on consent and the ability to regulate people is drastically limited.…

    • 981 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    One one hand, Hobbes discussed the necessity for a structure of government where an ultimate power would counteract the intrinsic selfishness of humans. Whereas, Montesquieu championed the idea of civic virtue arising from a society dedicated to liberty. Regardless of the specific nature of corruption, political corruption is a tiered concept because it does not end at the individual. Therefore, it is critical that the compounding effect of corruption should be curbed as as soon as possible. Wallis observed that “once independent, Americans worried continuously about their governments and how to design their political institutions to limit corruption” (Wallis 24).…

    • 1420 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Hobbes believes that if we were left without civilization to guide and control our selfish desires, humans would stop at no end to achieve them. In difference, Rousseau believes that the only reason humans act selfish is because society has made us this way, and he believes that without civilization, humans would act peacefully and freely. To add, Hobbes feels that humans should give up their rights and liberties to a higher power who rules their interest whereas Rousseau feels that sovereignty should be in the hands of the people and governments should just be enforcers. It is obvious that the differences between the two are dominant regarding the matter, in fact, they have nearly opposite…

    • 1083 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Decent Essays