Preview

Hobbes vs. Rosseau vs. Paine

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1380 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Hobbes vs. Rosseau vs. Paine
Great Ideologies Stemming Out From Chaos

Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Thomas Paine, three great political philosophers, all view the nature of man and society as anarchical, which is a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority, making it “war of all against all”. The utopian society of individuals enjoys complete freedom without government, wherein there is a display of a lack of morality for most of the time.
In the Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes presented the political state as a Leviathan—a sea monster. As a metaphor for the state, it is described as a replica of a person whose body is made up of all the bodies of its citizens, who are the literal members of the Leviathan 's body, and placing the sovereign as the head. In order for them to escape this natural condition, the people in the state constructed the Leviathan through social contract wherein they give up certain natural rights and transfer them to another person of authority. In turn, the power of the Leviathan protects them from the abuses of one another.
The source of inequality comes from the scarcity of resources. If one looks around at other animals—Hobbes specifically notes ants and bees—they appear to live harmoniously with one another without any sort of state or society. If they can do so, then why can 't men who are, after all, “animals” themselves? Hobbes discussed several reasons as to why men cannot live this way: the main one being that men are rational creatures. If we lived in some pre-societal concord with others, reason would always devise ways for us to cheat and make ourselves better off than others in order for us to survive. Furthermore, as we humans possess speech, we are able to mislead one another about our wants and desires. Hobbes also claims that animals naturally agree with one another while humans do not, and the reason for this essentially is because man is competitive in nature and therefore views everyone around



References: (n.d.). Rights of Man. Retrieved December 20, 2012, from http://www.enotes.com/rights-man salem/rights-man SparkNotes Editors. (n.d.). SparkNote on Discourse on Inequality. Retrieved December 20, 2012, from http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/inequality/

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Hobbes wrote a piece of work titled the Leviathan,which meant a powerful ruler.Hobbes wanted the people to give up their rights to become a strong organized government.n the Leviathan “he argued that people were naturally cruel,greedy,and selfish.”(Ellis and Esler 183)…

    • 539 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    For the past many years, people have been trying to figure out the relationship between the government and nature of man. The theories of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean Jacques Rousseau about the connection between nature of man and the government have been debated for many years. These three philosophers have remarkably influenced the way our system works today. Although each theory had its flaws and merits, Jean Jacques Rousseau’s theory is superior in comparison to Thomas Hobbes and John Locke.…

    • 514 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes Vs Machiavelli

    • 121 Words
    • 1 Page

    Lastly, both Hobbes and Machiavelli agree in their opinion of man what is one that is very negative. In the novel The Prince, Machiavelli states that men are “ungrateful, fickle, deceptive, and deceiving, avoiders of danger, eager to gain” (Machiavelli < 1542 > 2006). Similarly, in the novel Leviathan, Hobbes states how the life of a man is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Hobbes < 1651 > 2009). This shows how both Machiavelli and Hobbes see men and their lives as very negative aspects, but differ in what there perspectives are of it. Machiavelli explains how men are unreliable and not worth trusting when Hobbes is explaining how life naturally is terrible and without sovereignty, life and man are nothing.…

    • 121 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes, an Enlightenment philosopher, claimed that mankind is naturally evil and selfish and will cause conflicts “if any two men desire the same thing, which they nevertheless cannot both enjoy” or have differing opinions, in order to gain more power so that they can freely pursue their selfish desires, especially “during the time men live without a common power” and “in that condition which is called war, every man against every man,” and are therefore incapable of self-governing. Hobbes’ position on human nature is easily observable; intolerance and bigotry causes violence and general public…

    • 1210 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes' Remedy for

    • 680 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes begins Leviathan with Book 1: Of Man, in which he builds, layer by layer, a foundation for his eventual argument that the "natural condition" of man, or one without sovereign control, is one of continuous war, violence, death, and fear.…

    • 680 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    According to Hobbes, government is needed so that society will not collapse into violence due to humanity’s selfish desires and self-interest. Hobbes believes that humanity’s natural state is motivated by self-interest and will do everything they can to succeed in their endeavors. People will do whatever it takes to fulfill what their idea of ‘good ’is. When everyone acts this way it quickly devolves into chaos, war, and violence.…

    • 266 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    At first sight, Locke’s The Second Treatise of Government, seemed quite similar to Hobbes’s Leviathan. They both believed that a state of nature is a state that exist without government. They believe that men are created equal in this state, however Hobbes argues that because of self-preservation, man possessed the desire to control over other man. Locke, on the other hand, reasons with a more peaceful and pleasant place.…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Anti Utopian Analysis

    • 957 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Talmon argues that utopianism assumes an ‘ultimate harmony’ of individual expression and social cohesion. However, he asserts that without coercion, these values cannot in fact be reconciled; no society can hope for both ‘freedom’ and ‘salvation’. Berlin agrees, holding that ‘the necessity of choosing between absolute claims is… an inescapable characteristic of the human condition’. This is why anti-utopian authors believe that utopian thought conforms to the ‘anti-liberal’ aspect of Goodwin and Taylor’s definition of authoritarianism: freedom of choice in life is restricted or completely curtailed in order to achieve social cohesion.A utopia that serves as a useful example of this was conceived by Rousseau. In The Social Contract, he argues that members of an ideal legislature should, after rational consideration, conform to the ‘general will’. This is ‘the balance that remains, when we take away from [individual wills], the pluses and minuses which cancel each other out. For each individual, the general will becomes ‘their own’. Hence, when they obey it, they are obeying themselves. As a result of this, when people are coerced into following the general will, they are being ‘forced to be free’. Another key utopian thinker, Marx, proposes a theory that fulfils all three of Goodwin and Taylor’s criteria for authoritarianism. It holds that…

    • 957 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Locke and Thomas Hobbes were two main political philosophers during the seventeenth century. Hobbes is largely known for his writing of the “Leviathan”, and Locke for authoring "An Essay Concerning Human Understanding." Included in their essays, both men discuss the purpose and structure of government, natural law, and the characteristics of man in and out of the state of nature. The two men's opinion of man vary widely. Hobbes sees man as being evil, whereas Locke views man in a much more optimistic light. While in the state of nature and under natural law, they both agree that man is equal. However, their ideas of natural law differ greatly. Hobbes positions himself with the view that the state of nature is a state of war where every man is for himself and loyalty to another being will only bring dismay. Contrastingly, Locke sees natural law and the state of nature as a place of equality and freedom for all. Locke therefore believes that government is necessary in order to preserve natural law, and on the contrary, Hobbes sees government as necessary in order to control natural law.…

    • 1028 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan expressed his views of how the government should run the people they governed. Leviathan stated that the people should hand over their rights to one strong ruler. He believed that all humans were all naturally selfish and wicked and by having a ruler to have complete control over them, they will gain order and obedience. Thomas believed that without a strong ruler, people will constantly have war with one another and life would be “poor and short.” Hobbes called this agreement by which people created this type of government the “social contract”. In short, Hobbes believed that the best type of government was an absolute monarchy, which will impose order and demand obedience; a “sea monster” type of ruler to control the wicked people.…

    • 478 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    “according to Hobbes, is born political society. For the past 300 years, we have told ourselves a story in which humanity is a collection of rational self-seeking individuals; that society is the conflict of interests; that those conflicts are resolved by a central power given legitimacy by a social contract in which individuals recognize that it is in their interest to yield up part of their unfettered freedom; and that governments have emerged as the source of power through which conflicts are mediated.” (Hobbes, T., & Gaskin, J. C. A. (1998). Leviathan. Opposing Viewpoints.)…

    • 354 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Many who oppose government and advocate anarchy are in favor of voluntary associations or non-hierarchal organizations. However, the absence of government and presence of anarchy, to many, is unrealistic and dangerous because it can only be favorable to all under the assumption that we, as humans, are inherently good and will not cause mayhem if all law enforcement ceases to exist. Philosopher Immanuel Kant described anarchy as “freedom and law without force,” but to many freedom means being able to walk outside without fear and with the knowledge that our rights are protected by a system put in place in order to inforce the law. While the absence of government does relieve us from the restraints that impede our complete freedom, it also makes our safety completely dependent on the idea that humans are inherently good, an idea that has been proven wrong time and again through systematic racism, slavery, murder, and…

    • 484 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hobbes vs. Smith

    • 3192 Words
    • 13 Pages

    Hobbes and Smith are at odds about the idea of how power plays into social order creation. Hobbes believes that in the state of nature, man has no power to control others, and because of this, everyone is aggressive towards one another, as no one can trust another. Because of this, social order is necessary to give man incentive towards cooperation and trust, by selling your individual rights to freedom in order to gain social rights of security and safety. The role of the social order is to combat man’s aggressiveness, man’s power to hurt one another and direct this towards positive social ends instead of destructive.…

    • 3192 Words
    • 13 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In The Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes argues that the social contract between man and government allows man to exit the state of nature and enter the state of law. Each man comprises the body of the Leviathan, with only the head…

    • 750 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Thomas Hobbes Leviathan

    • 263 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Latin quote on the book cover translates into “There is no power on earth to be compared to him”. According to my own interpretation, in this front piece of Thomas Hobbes leviathan, the sea monster is presented as the absolute sovereign. He rules the people that form his being. All the people of that state are looking up to him in the image as to express their submission and acceptance of the social contract to be ruled.…

    • 263 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays