Preview

Hobbes vs. Rousseau

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
2320 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Hobbes vs. Rousseau
For one to be a good citizen, there are certain expectations a person must follow to achieve this goal. While many people have their own ideas of what makes a good citizen, there is little consensus to exactly what this would be. Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in their books The Leviathan and The Social Contract, create a system of political governing where the citizen plays a certain role and has certain expectations to carry out this role for the governmental system to work properly. In this paper, I will discuss what each of the men believed to be the role of the average citizen to support the state. Both men have quite different opinions in regards to the roles of citizens. While both are good theories, and create a strong case for government, neither is applicable in the real world because what is demanded of the citizen in these systems of government is based on certain assumptions. The assumptions made by these men, both good and bad, are not evident in the every day person. Thomas Hobbes believes, that all men are egocentric, by nature. This is to say that men spend their whole lives looking for what makes the happiest as an individual. Even when men socialize, it is not for the benefit of building strong ties between each other, but simply for personal benefit. Hobbes argues that man is self- centered in nature because he desires power. This arises from the fact that man, unlike animals, may seek things that are not tangible. Hobbes argues, not only are men egocentric, but also equal. Hobbes believes that even though every person may have different levels of strength, intelligence or character that all men are equal. "For such is the nature of men that, howsoever they may acknowledge many others to be more witty or more eloquent or more learned, yet they will hardly believe there be so many so wise as themselves, for they see their won wit at hand and other men 's at a distance." (Leviathan, 98) More importantly in dealing with equality, Hobbes


Bibliography: 1. Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan. First Touchstone Edition 1997. 2. Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, Social Contract. University of Oxford Press, London, 1947. 3. Mill, John Stuart, On Liberty. Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., 1978. Word Count: 2252

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • 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
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Ideas would be key to transforming loyal English colonists, first into revolutionaries and then into founders of a new nation.…

    • 108 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    In the Social Contract, Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s key viewpoint is that all men are born free, but end up being in chains everywhere in the course of their lives (Rousseau and Cole 2 ). Rousseau argues that modern political states repress the basic freedoms which men possess as their birthright. These political states then lead men into the civil society in which the civil freedoms of men are not secure. Most importantly, Rousseau points out that the legitimacy of political authority can only be a product of social that all citizens agree upon motivated by the need for mutual preservation. Throughout the book, Rousseau makes key distinctions that make the basis of the discussions in this essay.…

    • 799 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Rousseau Vs Hobbes

    • 209 Words
    • 1 Page

    In favor of Hobbes, he does make several valid points. His theory in regards to constant competition applies to this day, as people constantly find themselves in situations where they meet others that are of equal physical strengths and could be faced with a conflict as a result. Despite the points that Hobbes makes, his theory is overall negative, as living in a constant state of fear and paranoia is absolutely no way to live one’s life. Rousseau is very pertinent to remind others of how life was before society and technology took over. Life was extremely simple, and everyone was fairly alright with living alone and focusing on themselves and their life. If today’s society was the same as it was over a thousand years ago, almost no one would…

    • 209 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Locke Vs Hobbes

    • 184 Words
    • 1 Page

    Throughout history, people have debated about what government is, and what is the purpose of it. Should the government dictate people's lives and tell them what to do? Should the government be permissive and just allow the people take care of themselves and not step in? Should there be an in between? Two very influential philosophers from the 17th century Enlightenment, John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, are preeminent influences on how people see what a government is and what role it should take. They both were renowned influences in many governments, even to this day. Locke took the side that people are naturally good, and that they should rule themselves. While on the other hand, Hobbes said that humans are naturally brutish and evil,…

    • 184 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory 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

    Lord of the Flies: Hobbes vs. Locke In the novel, Lord of The Flies by William Golding, several young boys are stranded on an island and must maintain civilization on their own with no real authority. Their attempt at maintaining a peaceful and civilized state between each other can help to explain the theories of philosophy stated by Jack Hobbes and John Locke. In Locke’s philosophy, he states that people are naturally good. He believes that is in our nature, as humans, to be good people and do what it is that we know is right and what we are told is right.…

    • 584 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Hobbes vs Locke

    • 1466 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Both Hobbes and Locke shared similarities within their political theories; however their theories also had some major differences. Both men were responding to the crisis of the 17th century and they were highly influenced by the scientific revolution. Hobbes and Locke rejected all previous theories regarding human nature. They used the same methodology, and the men accepted an atomistic view of society. They believed that individuals were rational and were motivated by self-interest. Hobbes and Locke traced their theories from a state of nature to the social contract. They agreed that the legitimacy of the government rested on the consent of the governed. Together, both men rejected legitimate political authorities such as Divine Right of Kings, brute force, historical tradition, and feudal contracts. Both political philosophers offered interesting arguments pertaining to government, human nature, and the state of nature.…

    • 1466 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rousseau Analysis

    • 677 Words
    • 3 Pages

    In ancient times all men lived in a state of nature until hardships and the necessity to form a civil society between one another became eminent. Jean Jacques Rousseau’s “The Social Contract,” analyses the steps and reasoning behind this transition. In Rousseau’s work he focuses on several key terms in order to define this transition clearly, they include: state of nature, social contract, civil society, general will, and the sovereign.…

    • 677 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Bibliography: Gauthier, D. (1969) The Logic of ‘Leviathan’: The Moral and Political Theory of Thomas Hobbes. United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.…

    • 3361 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    1. The Enlightenment thinker that I most agree with is John Locke. I most agree with him because he concurs with Hobbes about the severity of the condition of nature, which obliges a social contract to guarantee peace. Be that as it may, he can't help contradicting 2 things. He contended that regular rights, for example, life, liberty, and property existed in the condition of nature and could never be taken away or even willfully surrendered by people. Locke additionally couldn't help contradicting Hobbes about the social contract. For him, it was an assention among the individuals, as well as in the middle of them and the sovereign. Despite the fact that he stood up for freedom of thought, speech, and religion,…

    • 389 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Locke vs Hobbes

    • 395 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Locke believed that, “human behavior came from thought which was learned and subject to the influence of reason and observation.” Locke’s main ideas were positive to the human race. He also states that humans know right from wrong, and they are intelligent enough to solve the problems in front of them and realizing what is lawful and unlawful. Locke believed, “God created man and we were, in effect, God’s property.”…

    • 395 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hobbes VS Locke

    • 273 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes and John Locke both had very different views on society and government. For Locke, natural rights could co-exist within a civil society and that natural rights and civil society were not mutually exclusive categories. While Hobbes thinks that the absolute power of the sovereign is simply the price mankind must pay for peace, Locke believes that absolute power is never a remedy for the state of nature. Hobbes and Locke also greatly differed in their opinions on the role of the state in society. Locke believed that government had obligations to fulfill, but not rights, and “cannot do as it pleases”. He saw necessary a separation of powers to protect the individual rights of the people, and if these rights were infringed or trust was violated, “people have the right to alter or abolish the government. These views were directly opposite to Hobbes. Hobbes was in favor of the opinion that the people have formed the government for peace and security, and that in return, people should not be allowed to change, judge, or protest against their government. He thought that an absence of government could lead to possibility of violent death, and therefore “government should never give up its power”.…

    • 273 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    When comparing Rousseau to Hobbes and Locke, the differences in their ideologies are prominent, however, they are still similar in some ways. In the State of Nature according to Rousseau, “man’s natural sentiment was that of his existence, his first care that of his preservation” (Discourse, Part II). This man is known as the “nascent man” and is often contrasted with the “savage man”, who exists in civilized society. In this State of Nature, man’s primary concern is to look after himself, similar to Hobbes’ and Locke’s, However, this is essentially the extent of the similarities between the three. Hobbes and Locke believe that man is naturally a societal animal who thrives with the presence of politics, whereas Rousseau believes exactly the opposite: that man is naturally a solitary animal, and that society corrupts us.…

    • 539 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rousseau believed that human nature is good but eventually they get brainwashed and become evil but Hobbes thinks otherwise. Hobbes states that humans are evil by nature and we need some sort of power in order to be controlled and be civilized. Rousseau thought that humans are born into the world with good intentions. He said there was a point when no one had property and we were happy. Eventually the human race began to grow, starting a chain of conflicts. Hobbes thought that by nature, we are very competitive and it leads to distrust, insecurity, and total chaos. Hobbes promotes monarchy as the perfect solution to control everyone and their problems. I agree with Rousseau’s point of view of the human race rather than Hobbes point of view because I don’t think humans are born evil, we become evil when we start claiming things as ours and we begin to compete with others.…

    • 503 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays