Differences Between Locke And Hobbes
The big differences that I noticed between Locke’s State of Nature and Hobbes’ State of Nature were that they both had different outlooks on the meaning of State of War and on people’s reaction to and with government. Locke believed that State of Nature is not equivalent to State of War whereas Hobbes made it seem that a State of Nature isn’t a safe place. Hobbes descried a State of Nature to be more violent and a state that people should fear. Locke’s view was more neutral compared to Hobbes’ idea. From what I read, it seemed that Locke believed the State of Nature to be kind of crazy, but this craziness isn’t good or bad. When Hobbes’ talked about government he talked mostly about how people think about themselves before others. People will
want to fill their needs and desires before anyone else in a time of “crisis”. When we talked about this idea of our class being abducted and only having limited resources wherever we ultimately get sent to, Hobbes would state that we would all fight over the resources and we would all be up against each other. When there is no leader or set government Hobbes thinks that people will have no morality and just do as they please. However, Locke’s outlook on this abduction case would be slightly different. Locke’s standpoint is almost the complete opposite of Hobbes’ ideas in the sense that Locke believes that government creates people to be more moral. When there is a government in place, laws are formed and Locke thinks that this changes the way people act and makes people more moral. Morality in this case is believed to originate from government. Locke thinks that government is the one thing that puts people in a State of Nature. Locke’s views are very different from Hobbes’ views and I think a big part of that difference stimulates from the idea of liberty. In Locke’s writings I noticed that he strongly believes that we are here to live our life with liberty with respect to others that is. I did notice that Hobbes mentioned the idea of having this right to live but he didn’t mention the liberty part, which is why I think Locke’s big focus is on government because with government liberty can be created.
want to fill their needs and desires before anyone else in a time of “crisis”. When we talked about this idea of our class being abducted and only having limited resources wherever we ultimately get sent to, Hobbes would state that we would all fight over the resources and we would all be up against each other. When there is no leader or set government Hobbes thinks that people will have no morality and just do as they please. However, Locke’s outlook on this abduction case would be slightly different. Locke’s standpoint is almost the complete opposite of Hobbes’ ideas in the sense that Locke believes that government creates people to be more moral. When there is a government in place, laws are formed and Locke thinks that this changes the way people act and makes people more moral. Morality in this case is believed to originate from government. Locke thinks that government is the one thing that puts people in a State of Nature. Locke’s views are very different from Hobbes’ views and I think a big part of that difference stimulates from the idea of liberty. In Locke’s writings I noticed that he strongly believes that we are here to live our life with liberty with respect to others that is. I did notice that Hobbes mentioned the idea of having this right to live but he didn’t mention the liberty part, which is why I think Locke’s big focus is on government because with government liberty can be created.