Beginning in the 1600s, European philosophers began thinking about how a nation should be governed. Many of these philosophers began moving towards a democracy, rather than the absolute monarchy they were under. Two of the most influential Enlightenment thinkers were John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Although John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau lived at different times during the Enlightenment period, Locke from 1632 to 1704 and Rousseau from 1712 to 1778, their thoughts on society and its political form are comparable. Both Locke and Rousseau believed that the people should form a government, however, their ideas of government differed. While Locke believed people should form a representative democracy, Rousseau believed people should
…show more content…
Locke felt that in a state of nature, all men are in perfect freedom and born with a right to liberty and property. This state of perfect freedom is neither good nor bad, however, it is anarchic. Locke believed that people cannot enjoy this state of freedom and that this state of freedom is voluntarily given up in order for people to acquire the advantages of a civilized society. Rousseau’s idea of the state of nature is that all people are free and equal, but primitive and animalistic. In contrast to Locke’s ideas, Rousseau believes that in a state of nature, people do not own property. Locke and Rousseau’s unequal views of state of nature resulted in their different ideas of …show more content…
Locke believed people needed to form a government in order to protect their property. As stated in The Second Treatise of Government, “The great and chief end, therefore, of men’s uniting into commonwealths and putting themselves under government is the preservation of property…” (Locke, 37). Under the rule of the king, the natural rights people had to property (life, liberty, and estates) were taken, however, Locke believed that by joining or creating a representative government, their natural rights would be preserved. In contrast, Rousseau believed that the purpose of a direct government was to bring harmony and unite the people under the general will. According to The Social Contract, once people can no longer survive in a primitive state, they willingly enter the social contract, and lose their animalistic ways. According to Rousseau, “Man loses by the social contract his natural liberty, and an unlimited right to all that tempts him, and which he can obtain; in return he acquires civil liberty, and proprietorship of all he possesses…In addition we might add to the other acquisitions of the civil state that of moral liberty, which alone renders a man master of himself; for it is slavery to be under the impulse of mere appetite, and freedom to obey a law in which we prescribe for ourselves” (Rousseau, 79-80). Unlike Locke, Rousseau believed that
Locke felt that in a state of nature, all men are in perfect freedom and born with a right to liberty and property. This state of perfect freedom is neither good nor bad, however, it is anarchic. Locke believed that people cannot enjoy this state of freedom and that this state of freedom is voluntarily given up in order for people to acquire the advantages of a civilized society. Rousseau’s idea of the state of nature is that all people are free and equal, but primitive and animalistic. In contrast to Locke’s ideas, Rousseau believes that in a state of nature, people do not own property. Locke and Rousseau’s unequal views of state of nature resulted in their different ideas of …show more content…
Locke believed people needed to form a government in order to protect their property. As stated in The Second Treatise of Government, “The great and chief end, therefore, of men’s uniting into commonwealths and putting themselves under government is the preservation of property…” (Locke, 37). Under the rule of the king, the natural rights people had to property (life, liberty, and estates) were taken, however, Locke believed that by joining or creating a representative government, their natural rights would be preserved. In contrast, Rousseau believed that the purpose of a direct government was to bring harmony and unite the people under the general will. According to The Social Contract, once people can no longer survive in a primitive state, they willingly enter the social contract, and lose their animalistic ways. According to Rousseau, “Man loses by the social contract his natural liberty, and an unlimited right to all that tempts him, and which he can obtain; in return he acquires civil liberty, and proprietorship of all he possesses…In addition we might add to the other acquisitions of the civil state that of moral liberty, which alone renders a man master of himself; for it is slavery to be under the impulse of mere appetite, and freedom to obey a law in which we prescribe for ourselves” (Rousseau, 79-80). Unlike Locke, Rousseau believed that