John Locke And Thomas Hobbes Analysis

Improved Essays
John Locke and Thomas Hobbes are two philosophers who are well-known for their theories about the improvement of society and debating man in his natural state. John Locke, and Thomas Hobbes, had very different opinions on people and on politics. John Locke believed that men were born free, are generally peaceful beings, and that they were capable of co-operative decision-making to guarantee keeping their natural rights to life, freedom, and especially property. Thomas Hobbes on the other hand believed that men were selfish, were often at war with each other, and that they needed an absolute supreme to maintain their natural rights, especially their right to life. Their philosophies are both mentally understanding, but in nature, they are hugely …show more content…
Hobbes wrote "during the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man" and “the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short”. Even during Hobbes time in the 1640s and 1650s, there were no large states, just small villages. Did people fall into disorder? No. They lived in nature. Even with someone in charge (King Charles I) he couldn’t keep everything in nature his mistakes even got him beheaded. Hobbes thought of men cannot know good and evil, and in consequence can only live in peace together by subjection to the absolute power of a common master and it is true that its wrong because native Americans without a government still lived in harmony and were in peace with each …show more content…
Look at the states even their government is falling down the crime rates is raising at 4.4%. The way Hobbes put all his trust with the government is not always right many countries even with a leader is still developing and most of them are in war. Hobbes theory about human nature and society can be related to the situation between America and Iraq. The United States is claiming that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction and wants them to deactivate the weapons immediately. Iraq disagrees with the claim. The United States has distributed a demand: Iraq must disassemble the weapons or else the United States will invade Iraq and deactivate the weapons themselves. There is a tie between the two sides and unless a resolution can be reached quickly, war is certain and about to happen. Two leaders and no peace. Locke and Hobbes were really opposites and the way they were raised gave them these theories. Hobbes theory was too negative about man and was to bias about how a leader is the only way to peace and how freedom of speech will get you killed. Hobbes theory was just not functional in today’s world compared to Locke’s and even back then. Overall leaving Locke’s theory as the better and most reasonable

Related Documents

  • Superior Essays

    In Hobbes view, if the sovereign can easily be overthrown, then you don’t really have a sovereign. They are, in a sense, immune (something close to a dictator). For Hobbes, where there is no rule there is no justice. Without a legal system in place, there is no conception of justice. The only way to make sure our selfishness doesn’t get out of control is an absolute…

    • 1117 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It is known that the American Constitution was inspired by the ideas of others. Philosophers John Locke and Thomas Hobbes happen to be some of the most influential figures in our nations government. Their theories on the most ideal form of government have had lasting effects on the United States. Their ideas did not always agree with each other, but they still helped form the government that we have had for over two hundred years in America. Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were both English philosophers.…

    • 602 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Hobbes states that “in order to live a more contented life… men must give up their freedom to the State” (Document 2). He believed that people were naturally cruel and needed protection from themselves. Hobbes wanted rule by absolute monarchs. He thought it was the only way to keep people in check. His beliefs closely supported how many people thought back then.…

    • 490 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It is from this idea that Hobbes argues that the fear of death and bodily harm usher man to seek collective peace. The anarchy of the state of nature is consistent with the continual emotion of fear, fear that someone will steal your property or perhaps enslavement. To relieve this tension and enjoy life with less worry, Hobbes claims that people create a social contract between them and a ruler. According to him, people would essentially give up their power to one ruler who in turn, the ruler would ensure they could live peacefully. The only right left to the people, after they give all their power to a ruler and agree to abide by those laws, is the right to not be killed.…

    • 1099 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    ‘For Hobbes, the purpose of politics is to escape war. As such, he insists that in order to establish a democratic political order, all individuals need to hand over their will to a single point of ultimate authority’ (Field, 2015). Due to their beliefs on human nature, Hobbes and Machiavelli shared comparable principles with regards to the need of a sovereign ruler, and the requirement for a functioning supreme power in order to control the people. In the enlightenment period in which Hobbes wrote in his book the Leviathan about the human nature of people, he, similarly to Machiavelli, described that they were selfish and war-prone. Hobbes believed that people are not born with the understanding of what was right…

    • 1550 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    government. Hobbes ideas impact our daily lives mainly his belief that states that the people should give up some of their rights to a more absolute power to protect them and regulate the society around them. This idea is known as a social compact or contract that states that, in their natural state, Hobbes believed that people would fight only for their self-interest and attack those who were in pursuit of their interests. The only way to stop people from engaging in this natural act was to create a government that would enforce the law and protect people from their state of nature. Hobbes negative view towards the nature of humans parallels that of the United States Constitution and Declaration of Independence.…

    • 1238 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Decent Essays

    Hobbes beilved the goverment was to protect us from ourselves and Locke beilved it was to protect the natural rights. Hobbes beilved that the goverments power can not be limited and Locke beilved it…

    • 84 Words
    • 1 Pages
    Decent Essays
  • Great Essays

    Thomas Hobbes and John Locke both agree that subjects shall summit to a sovereign their right and obligations such as, judgment and consequences. It can be due to both having the notion that their ideal ruler(s) should have some sort of authority towards their men. In order to guide them to peace. Also by doing this their sovereign(s) can be portrayed as superior and subject’s inferior by having more rights and entitlement than them. In other words, it creates some hierarchical system where both Hobbes and Locke ideal ruler(s) authorize all that occurs within society and subjects shall be obedient with minimal input.…

    • 2054 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Throughout Chapter 1 of Keeping the Republic, Barbour and Wright discuss the ideologies of three influential members of Politics: James Madison, John Locke, and Thomas Hobbes. Beginning with Madison, he believed strongly in having a republic. As the text describes it, a republic differs from a traditional sense of a democracy, as representation is required. (p.16-17). Madison believed that in a “True Democracy”, everyone would only be acting with their own self-interest in mind.…

    • 663 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    PS4217F Major Political Thinkers: Hobbes Assignment 1: What are the main strengths and weaknesses of Hobbes’ theory of civil order? Name: Denise Cher Yan Wen Matriculation Number: A0127001A Word Count: 1887 Introduction Hobbes’ theory of civil order is based on the fundamental law of nature, which is to seek peace (Hobbes 2012, 200). According to Hobbes, to seek peace is necessarily to seek peace in the condition of war, and justice is therefore a legal compliance with the terms of the social contract (Hobbes 2012, 220).…

    • 1919 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Hobbes and Locke are both social contract theorists who have influenced many citizens of this country. To begin, they both start out talking about human nature. Locke and Hobbes had very different views regarding human nature. Locke claimed human nature as reason and Hobbes claimed it as power and appetite. Locke believes that reason is the primary attribute of human nature.…

    • 706 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Both theorists believe in natural rights and freedoms and how men establish governments in order to secure peace however they differ on the purpose of government. Hobbes believed the purpose of government is to impose law and order to prevent the state of war. Locke believed the purpose of government is to secure natural rights, namely man’s property and liberty. Both refer to a “state of nature” in which man exists without government, and both speak of risks in this state. However, while both speak of the dangers of a state of nature, Hobbes is more pessimistic, whereas Locke speaks of the potential benefits.…

    • 908 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Hobbes Views On Rebellion

    • 1557 Words
    • 7 Pages

    Extremely unlike Hobbes’s view, Locke had a more positive view of human nature and believed in their views and opinions. Locke believed humans could improve themselves and even a government if they were willing to do, so while Hobbes on the other hand believed that humans were narcissistic and only thought about themselves and strived for their own benefit. It is in Locke’s book “The Second Treatise on Government” that the most precise examinations into the right of revolution can be found. Its clear from his book that the right of rebellion and revolution ties hand in hand with Locke’s political theory. this book was used almost to justify the revolution in the late seventeenth century (O’Tool,2011).…

    • 1557 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Hobbes wants the society to work together meaning giving some rights up in exchange for protection. “This equality of ability produces equality of hope for the attaining of our goals” (Thomas Hobbes). For example, if two people want something they both can’t enjoy or use then they quickly become enemies. Hobbes view, “A law of nature is a command or general rule, discovered by reason, which forbids a man to do anything that is destructive of his life or takes away his means for preserving his life, and forbids him to omit anything by which he thinks his life can best be preserved” (Leviathan, Chapter 14). Those who debate this subject often mistake right and law to be the same yet they ought to be distinguished.…

    • 1796 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Thomas Hobbes believes humans are born evil, their natural instinct is to be envious, violent, and narcissistic, however, by fear and reason, they are capable of preserving peace. On the other hand, John Locke believes humans are mostly peaceful, good, and pleasant, but circumstances can cause people to be violent and war-like. Locke and Hobbes also differed in social contract theories, whereby John Locke believed that all people have rights that need to be protected by a government, yet the people should remain in power; Thomas Hobbes supported the idea that people are all bad, and because of that, an ultimate ruler needs to establish laws that man should abide by. Although these views seem very apples and oranges, there is a huge discrepancy. John Locke promoted the preservation of all human rights, and on several occasions disapproved of slavery, however, it turns out that he actually endorsed it and proposed that people should have absolute power over them.…

    • 1347 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays