Locke and Hobbes use their states of nature to help construct their governments, and is crucial to their theories. Locke’s state of nature allows for rebellion and protection of private property by making the state of nature peaceful, so people do not fear falling back into the state of nature. Hobbes, on the other hand, creates a state of nature that is cruel and brutal to prevent the want to overthrow the government, because any state is better than the state of nature. Both Hobbes’ and Locke’s theories of government depend on their theories as to what the state of nature is.
The natural condition (which is the term Hobbes uses, rather than the state of nature) is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Hobbes 619) according to Thomas …show more content…
Naturally, men endeavor to obtain their desires. Those desires are never ending, and also scarce without society 's influence on mankind. If two men desire the same thing, they become enemies and fight for that thing which they desire. For this reason, commodious living is impossible, because every man will desire such living. For example, if one man was to put his labor into creating shelter for himself, it is likely that because he desired that shelter, another also desires it. Because of that, and natural equality of ability which allows anyone to kill anyone, they are in danger of being killed for that shelter. Further, the individual who killed for that shelter is too now in danger for the same reasons. So, rather than set forth to help better the lives of themselves through the development of agriculture, shelter, and property, individuals instead struggle to survive, being in constant fear of death while trying to obtain their desires. Hobbes states, “So that in the nature of man, we find three principal causes of quarrel. First, competition; secondly, diffidence; thirdly, glory” (Hobbes 619). Competition causes men to quarrel to gain something because they desire such an object, as described above. Diffidence is out of safety—defending yourself. Glory is for the sake of reputation.
The natural condition, according to Hobbes, is in a constant …show more content…
In Locke’s state of nature, like Hobbes, every man is naturally equal and has perfect freedom. This equality and freedom is limited by the law of nature, which is not the same as Hobbes’. Locke claims there are laws within our natural state that make each individual obligated to mutual love. Locke states, “…no one ought to harm another in his life health, liberty, or possessions” (Locke 713). We have liberty to do what we like with our natural liberty, but we do not have liberty to destroy ourselves or another person because of this natural
The natural condition (which is the term Hobbes uses, rather than the state of nature) is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Hobbes 619) according to Thomas …show more content…
Naturally, men endeavor to obtain their desires. Those desires are never ending, and also scarce without society 's influence on mankind. If two men desire the same thing, they become enemies and fight for that thing which they desire. For this reason, commodious living is impossible, because every man will desire such living. For example, if one man was to put his labor into creating shelter for himself, it is likely that because he desired that shelter, another also desires it. Because of that, and natural equality of ability which allows anyone to kill anyone, they are in danger of being killed for that shelter. Further, the individual who killed for that shelter is too now in danger for the same reasons. So, rather than set forth to help better the lives of themselves through the development of agriculture, shelter, and property, individuals instead struggle to survive, being in constant fear of death while trying to obtain their desires. Hobbes states, “So that in the nature of man, we find three principal causes of quarrel. First, competition; secondly, diffidence; thirdly, glory” (Hobbes 619). Competition causes men to quarrel to gain something because they desire such an object, as described above. Diffidence is out of safety—defending yourself. Glory is for the sake of reputation.
The natural condition, according to Hobbes, is in a constant …show more content…
In Locke’s state of nature, like Hobbes, every man is naturally equal and has perfect freedom. This equality and freedom is limited by the law of nature, which is not the same as Hobbes’. Locke claims there are laws within our natural state that make each individual obligated to mutual love. Locke states, “…no one ought to harm another in his life health, liberty, or possessions” (Locke 713). We have liberty to do what we like with our natural liberty, but we do not have liberty to destroy ourselves or another person because of this natural