Thomas Hobbes And John Locke: The Power Of Man As A Civil Society

Superior Essays
Human life has long been shaped and susceptible to civil society. John Locke theorizes that man, by nature, is a social animal. Mankind is more apt to gain freedoms, identities, and interests through a civil society, rather than nature. However, another philosopher and writer believed differently; Thomas Hobbes was of the idea that man was not of a societal nature and that society could and would not exist except for the power of a state. Hobbes, in his writings, took on more of a philosophical absolutism approach for his theories on government and men, whereas Locke took a philosophical and biblical constitutionalism approach towards government and human life. Locke theorized that a civil society comes before the state, both morally and …show more content…
Locke says that men give up their right to attempt retribution for crimes against them in return for fair justice supported by overwhelming force. Man retains the right to life and liberty, and gains the right to just and impartial protection of their property. Hobbes, however, has a drastically different approach. Put simply, its man against man. Hobbes alleged that every man is another man’s mortal enemy. He also states that no matter what the sovereign does, whether it is unlawful, unjust, or violent, it does not constitute an encroachment of the social contract. Additionally, Hobbes states that the people have no right to rebel whatsoever. The sovereign’s will is the definition of good or evil for their subjects. He (the monarch) does not wrong, because lawful/unlawful and good/evil are at the discretion of the will of the sovereign. Locke disagrees and states that the state exists to solely to protect the natural rights of its people. When a government fails to do so, citizens have the right (and even the duty) to renounce their support and even to rebel. Locke opposes Hobbes’s view that the original state of nature was “nasty, brutish, and short,” and that people, by way of a social contract, yielded their rights as to benefit their own self. Locke counters with this, “And hence it is that he who attempts to get another man into his absolute power does …show more content…
He was of the opinion that people are born with rights, which they then resign to the sovereign in return of protections, this was known as a social contract. He thought that men were selfish and cruel and only acted in their own self-interests. He did not think that men could be trusted to rule themselves and that an absolute ruler was necessary to maintain civil societal order; the purpose of government was to uphold justice, law, and order. For Locke, he was more in favor of a democratic form of government. Locke believed that individuals were born with certain unalienable rights (life, liberty, and the right to property). He also thought that people were more than capable of governing themselves. Locke theorized that the purpose of government was to ensure and protect the people’s rights and liberties. According to Locke, the only important role of the government was to ensure that justice is done. According to Hobbes, no matter what the government does, it is just by the very meaning of the word; all of society is a direct design of the state and a deliberation of the determination of the

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    It is due to man’s tendency to compete, act diffident and seek glory in his natural state that this state often leads to war , more so without a common power to keep men in place . One can argue that Hobbes over-emphasizes the dreadfulness of the state of nature to prove that rational individuals are willing to relinquish certain liberties to obtain the security provided by a Commonwealth, be it one with absolute power. His pessimistic view on people in the state of nature is contrary to that of Locke, who believes that subjects are equal in the state of nature not because anyone is capable of killing anyone, rather because no one is subject to any higher…

    • 1217 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Fundamentally, Montesquieu’s realist philosophy differs from Hobbes’ argument for the lone necessity of an absolute monarchy. Similarly, James Madison’s beliefs towards the inherent selfishness of humans are akin to Thomas Hobbes’ beliefs. However, he remained hopeful that humans are in fact capable of virtue and declared, “(1) men are not always angels, and therefore structures must help us; and (2) virtue is necessary, and structures alone cannot help us” (Teachout 46). This belief that people can both be self-interested and public-interested draws on Montesquieu’s philosophy that “virtue was necessary for good government and good structure was necessary for virtue” (Teachout 41). In this case, Madison’s plan for self-governance incorporated both the necessity of civic virtue and the…

    • 1420 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In effect, the government is something that the people themselves create as a means to mitigate conflicting parties and ensure that mean, which are born equal, are treated equally. While it is true that the ruling parties must have power over individuals and the ability to mandate certain laws these laws should always be focused on protecting the rights of the people. All of these theories on government, power, representation and leadership stem from the idea that people are born equally and that they rationally and logically want a society that protects these equalities from passion or aggression that opposes natural law. They are a necessity because while men may want cooperation and social constructs he is not infallible, and when a system is in place that acknowledges these fallibilities it prevents the state of war. These natural laws may seem contradictory when used as a means to support justified warfare, how can the right to life be taken away?…

    • 711 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The point of a government is to protect its people. Locke believed that if a government acts out of line and in their own self-interest, the people who are under its control should rebel against them and then construct a new government. He thought that man was able to govern themselves since they naturally were unselfish. Thomas Hobbes was another English philosopher who had pessimistic views that were a little different than Locke’s.…

    • 849 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Locke believed in a limited, representative government while Rousseau believed in a direct form of government by the people. Locke believed that the powers of the government are to be limited. He believed the government should only exist to protect life, liberty, and property and if the government were to overstep that authority, then the public would have a right to overthrow the government. As I said before, Thomas Jefferson paid homage to these ideals during his drafting of the Declaration of Independence. Along with separation of powers between the House of Commons and House of Lords,2 Locke’s ideals greatly influenced American government where power is vested in a bicameral legislature along with an executive and judicial branch.…

    • 1297 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Superior Essays

    There would be no protection to their being, they would simply be following Locke's idea of uncertainty where equality is presenting itself as an option. Locke proves to show that yes, his people do have equality of their life, liberty, and property, but, also, the right to "judge of, and punish the breaches of that law in others, as he is persuaded the offence deserves, even with death itself, in crimes where the heinousness of the fact, in his opinion, requires it" (Locke 46). Locke insists on proving the right to protecting one's property to be a part of the natural law as if owning…

    • 1596 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Hobbes cared about maximizing liberty, defining social justice, and knowing how to divide the limits of the government power. The process of the state of nature is formed by a community and a government. People would view him as a “Psychological egoist” he was over the top with an unrealistic view of human nature. In the laws of nature and the social contract, “Hobbes thinks the state of nature is something we ought to avoid, at any cost except our own self presentation” (Thomas Hobbes). Hobbes believed in a social contract and how it would help the government rule the society.…

    • 1796 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Hobbes believed that people can only live in peace when they turn over all rights to a sovereign. Hobbes social contract states that no matter what, you must abide by the sovereign, and nothing they do can violate the contract. Locke believed that if a sovereign starts to have too much power, the people have the right to rebel and fight for their rights. Hobbes views the sovereign as almost Godlike, to never be questioned and always obeyed. Locke on the other hand, follows a more modern view on government, power should not be absolute, and the people have the right to rebel if they feel they are being mistreated.…

    • 1195 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Their theories differ when it comes to the extension of the state of war, the more negative Hobbes perspective on the natural state of man and his use of examples. Hobbes sees man as selfish while Locke has another completely different perspective. He thinks of man as someone with an innate morality. These visions are involved in the way of government that each philosopher recommends. Locke believes that the law is a means to comply with the dictates of nature.…

    • 923 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This sovereign power will protect the commonwealth by instituting laws and punishments that hold people accountable for their actions. It is meant to suppress the desires of men by maintaining a threat of fear over them. Punishments are established in order to restrain the ruthless ambition men have when it comes to attaining their wants. In the natural condition there is no “visible power” tied to the “fear of punishment” (106). That is why it is necessary to have a commonwealth, or sovereign authority to force people to uphold the contract.…

    • 1634 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays