Comparing Hobbes And Durkheim's Three Major Theories

Human nature amongst theorists differentiates tremendously. Hobbes a structural theorists, and the proclaimed father of structural theories, theorizes “that human nature stems from the fact that people want to live” (Rawlings PP 1-2). Hobbes is a theorists who believes that humans are naturally mean. He argues this because he claims every man is against every man in nature. Hobbes then argues that humans are “unable to control their desires and the more horrible you are, the more stuff you get, and the more honor you are given” (Rawlings 1-2). This is why Hobbes argues without power outside each individual society will crumble because everyone only looks out for themselves. Hobbes, argues that their needs to be something in society that helps hold a moral code amongst humans or our natural human nature tendencies may lead the society in the wrong …show more content…
Hobbes and Durkheim agree that society is about integration. Durkheim argues that all societies evolved from ones before and everything that we are doing today is nothing new. Hobbes then argues societies developed the way they did because of the selfishness in humans. Hobbes argues “Joining together by a small number of men does not give it security, because in small numbers, small additions on the one side or the other, make the others advantage of strength so great, as is proficient to carry the victory; and therefor gives encouragement to invasion” (Hobbes 103). Subsequently, Hobbes argues humans put all of their faith into one man or a group of people to run the society, and that is how early societies formed with a hierarchy of power. Hobbes argues the man or group of men in power should have the ultimate power to strike fear in humans, and to enforce laws and regulations as needed. That ultimately they are God, the