Both Hobbes and Locke use equality of men in a state of nature as the starting point for their theories of the rise of government. They both begin by describing man’s true nature as he would naturally appear on earth before the formation of society. These theorists were not only attempting to describe the state of nature and man's formation of government but were also encouraging governmental reform. Thomas Hobbes view of equality, in Levithan, is essentially pessimistic. He contends that no value judgements can be placed on equality or men in the state of nature because justice and injustice could not exist except when the power of the state is there to legislate what is right and wrong. He believes that equality is one in which man has no
…show more content…
However, Hobbes notes that sometimes nature manifest individuals with stronger bodies or quicker minds but at the end of the day the difference between them is not considerable (Hobbes 87). Take for example, if two men of unequal strength fight to kill one another the weakest one can still plan or ally himself with someone to defeat his opponent. He also believes cognitive faculties to be of greater equality amongst men than that of strength. This can be seen when the author writes, “for such is nature of men, that howsoever they may awcknowledge many others to be more witty or more learned; they will hardly believe there be so many wise as themselves” (Hobbes 87). If that is true then man cannot claim to have inherent benefits that are not already possessed by every other man.Therefore, it does not matter what physical or mental ability you have you still have an equal opportunity to succeed in the state of nature and that equal opportunity is what Hobbes views as the equality of …show more content…
Men enter society when their preservations of property are guaranteed (Locke 213). With this in mind Locke contends that authority must be confined by laws. This can be seen when the author writes, “the ruling power ought to govern by declared and received laws and not by extemporary dictates…for than mankind will be in a far worse condition than in the State of Nature” (Locke 213). Therefore, Locke proposes that individuals empower the state through mutual agreement of social contract to enact laws that everyone is expected to obey through consent. In contrast to Hobbes, rebellion here is
However, Hobbes notes that sometimes nature manifest individuals with stronger bodies or quicker minds but at the end of the day the difference between them is not considerable (Hobbes 87). Take for example, if two men of unequal strength fight to kill one another the weakest one can still plan or ally himself with someone to defeat his opponent. He also believes cognitive faculties to be of greater equality amongst men than that of strength. This can be seen when the author writes, “for such is nature of men, that howsoever they may awcknowledge many others to be more witty or more learned; they will hardly believe there be so many wise as themselves” (Hobbes 87). If that is true then man cannot claim to have inherent benefits that are not already possessed by every other man.Therefore, it does not matter what physical or mental ability you have you still have an equal opportunity to succeed in the state of nature and that equal opportunity is what Hobbes views as the equality of …show more content…
Men enter society when their preservations of property are guaranteed (Locke 213). With this in mind Locke contends that authority must be confined by laws. This can be seen when the author writes, “the ruling power ought to govern by declared and received laws and not by extemporary dictates…for than mankind will be in a far worse condition than in the State of Nature” (Locke 213). Therefore, Locke proposes that individuals empower the state through mutual agreement of social contract to enact laws that everyone is expected to obey through consent. In contrast to Hobbes, rebellion here is