Preview

John Locke Vs Hobbes

Better Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1149 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
John Locke Vs Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke both set out important arguments on the nature of government that continue to influence the way in which we think about the relationship between the governed and the government. Compare and contrast Hobbes’ and Locke’s arguments, with specific reference both to their reading of the “state of nature” and the kind of contract that each imagines to exist in the very concept of a governed community. Although each is making claims to a universal understanding of man, to what degree were their ideas influenced by their interpretation of history?

Hobbes and Locke both set out valid yet differing views on the nature of government that influence our thoughts regarding how we are governed. The first thing we have to take into consideration is the age of Hobbes and Locke at the time of the Glorious Revolution in England as it was a critical point molding their thoughts regarding their understanding of men and the
…show more content…
However, Hobbes argues that such a “dissolute condition of masterlesse men, without subjection to Lawes, and a coercive Power to tye their hands from rapine, and revenge” would make impossible all of the basic security upon which comfortable, sociable, civilized life depends. Hobbes understands that there will be a halt in the progress of society if there is no authority governing the actions of people. He mentions in the Leviathan, that there would be “no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain; and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by Sea; no commodious Building; no Instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force; no Knowledge of the face of the Earth; no account of Time; no Arts; no Letters; and which is worst of all, continuall feare, and danger of violent

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were very different Enlightenment philosophers.They had many similarities and differences on what form of government they should form for the people.For example Thomas Hobbes believed in a powerful government,and John Locke believed in a limited government where the government should protect the people’s natural rights. Both of these philosophers were seventeen century enlightenment thinkers.Thomas Hobbes and John Locke had very different points of view on how the government should be formed for the people.…

    • 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

    After analyzing how Locke and Hobbes understand the state of nature it is evident that they share many ideas but they also show essential differences in their ideas. Hobbes regards the state of nature as a state of war, in which natural law is established only after a process of reasoning. This process leads men to the conclusion that they must somehow find…

    • 397 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good 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

    For Hobbes, the need of an outright power, as a Sovereign, took after from the utter ruthlessness of the State of Nature. The State of Nature was totally grievous, thus objective men would will to submit themselves even to outright power with a specific end goal to escape it. For John Locke, 1632-1704, the State of Nature is an altogether different sort of spot, thus his contention concerning the social contract and the way of men's relationship to power are subsequently entirely distinctive. While Locke uses Hobbes' methodological gadget of the State of Nature, as do for all intents and purposes all social contract scholars, he utilizes it to a very distinctive end. Locke's contentions for the social contract, and for the privilege of residents…

    • 152 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Chapter 18

    • 1729 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Hobbes.
Thomas Hobbes. (1588-1679). ‘Born premature when mother heard of oncoming Armada.’ At 40, he took Euclid’s geometry as starting point to make mechanical model of universe (man and society). Mechanism (based on motion) was to greatly influence thinking over next few centuries. Witness to upheaval of civil war in England in 1640s. Fled to France. 1651. Publishes "Leviathan.”Hobbes sees state of nature sans government as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." Promulgates absolute monarch thesis. Says people (wholly selfish) should escape chaos of everyday life, give up their freedom to ruler who guarantees peace and order. In his state Hobbes saw ruler as absolute with men having no right to rebel since this would break the social contract and be illogical.…

    • 1729 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Satisfactory 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
  • 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
  • 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

    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

    Locke Vs Hobbes Essay

    • 669 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The battle between Hobbes and Locke still continues today through their influence on governments and how they believed government should work. Hobbes believed in an absolute monarch where they were to demand obedience in order to maintain order. On the other hand, John Locke thought that a Democracy was a better form of government provided that they had the right information to make. This form of government allows the people to keep their natural rights rather than giving them up in exchange for protection by the monarch. As a result of their views on human nature and what form government should take, it is easy to see why Lockean government is more powerful than Hobbesian by looking at past governments in history as well as logically.…

    • 669 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The argument presented by Thomas Hobbes in chapter 13 of Leviathan, is that the state of nature is a state of war of all against all. Such a view had previously been discussed- earlier versions of the argument appear in other significant works- however it is Hobbes account of a state in “continuall feare of danger and violent death”1 upon which I will focus on and critique in this essay. There are many reasons why many seem to regard Hobbes argument as the most accurate portrayal of a pre-civilised society, many believe it to be so straightforward and seemingly correct that to object it would be to ignore a necessary truth. Secondly, those who accept Hobbes’ view of a human nature that is so egotistical and unforgiving, would seemingly too agree to the assumption of a gloomy, unbearable state of nature. In this essay I shall argue that such opinions are not logically justified as Hobbes’s argument holds its foundations solidly in assumption alone, an assumption that was heavily moulded on his surroundings of a savage Civil War. Hobbes’s argument lies solely on the grounds that human beings are intrinsically wicked and self-centred beings an argument that cannot be completely validated and therefore cannot be a ‘necessary truth’. Yet despite holding such a bleak outlook on the human condition and its simple invalidity the work of Thomas Hobbes still shapes the political word today2 and it continues to impact our understanding of human nature and interactions. In order to justify my critique of Hobbes I will begin by presenting both his original argument and a brief view of some modern interpretations before cross examining their conclusions against that of other social contract theorist such as Locke and Rousseau as well as rational logic to present the argument that the state of nature is most certainly not a state of war of all against all.…

    • 3361 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    The seventeenth century in England was a time of many kings. Within a century, the reigns of five kings as well as a military dictator had run rampant over England’s government. Starting with James I, the English monarchy traversed to Charles I, Oliver Cromwell, Charles II, James II, and finally William III. With the ascensions of Cromwell and William III, drastic events changed the course of England’s history, as well as influencing two famous philosophical men. Thomas Hobbes, author of Leviathan, and John Locke, author of Second Treatise on Civil Government, drew on their experiences of England’s monarchical turmoil to conceive very different political theories. Both Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were prominent political philosophers in the…

    • 967 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hobbes VS Locke

    • 273 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Lastly, I believe that the stance and role of government was the biggest difference in the philosophies of Hobbes and Locke. While Locke believed that the government’s job should be to protect the rights of the people and could be overthrown, Hobbes’ view was the complete opposite that government should never give up power, and was only there to protect peace and security, not the rights of the people.…

    • 273 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Have you ever wondered how our government was created? Two philosophers named Thomas Hobbes and John Locke played significant roles in the shaping of what is now our government. Both philosophers lived during the period of Enlightenment. Thomas Hobbes had a negative view of mankind, while John Locke had a positive view of it. Both men wrote a book and\or an essay about social contract. Each philosopher had different views on government. Thomas Hobbes and John Locke had opposing views on rebellion, too. Both men had substantial accomplishments in their lifetimes. Each philosopher played a large role in creating the government that we have today.…

    • 914 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays