Locke And Hobbes Comparison Essay

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are some of the most famous philosophers, which also had a huge impact on government. Hobbes and Locke have opposing viewpoints when it comes to the state of nature, which refers to the lack of social structures. Hobbes views the natural state as unsatisfactory, believes revolutions are wrong and that nature has more of an effect on someone than nurture. However, Hobbes and Locke agree that some form of government is needed for society, proving that Hobbes and Locke have more differences than similarities.
One difference to begin with would be the views on the state of nature by Hobbes and Locke. Hobbes views the state of nature as insufficient; although, Locke believes that it is acceptable. Like said Hobbes thinks the natural state
is inadequate because humanity cannot function in its natural state. Hobbes states “For the savage people in many places of America have no government at all, and live at this day in that brutish manner as I said before” (97). In other words, the lack of government will result in brutality and war. In humanity, there will always be people who dislike each other, which leaves no assurance that war will not break out. However, Locke believes that the state of nature is a positive thing. Locke had a more positive view on things. He believed society would not be as brutal as Hobbes believed, which is proved in the book Reading the World: Ideas That Matter: “…nor did he [Locke] perceive human nature as inherently self-interested and aggressive” (Austin 100). Locke held people to higher standards than Hobbes, which is why Locke thought war wouldn’t break out as much as Hobbes assumed. Therefore, Locke holds a positive view on the state of nature, unlike Hobbes.
Additionally, Locke sees political revolutions as a positive thing. Hobbes thinks the opposite. Locke believed that humans had the right to “the protection of life, liberty, and the right to own property (Austin 100) and they had access to those rights by forfeiting liberty to the state. Locke called that a two-way contract. When the state begins to fail upholding its end, the people can protest or “renegotiate the terms of the contract” (Austin 100). Locke uses that as his example to prove that political revolutions are a positive thing when used correctly. On the contrary, Hobbes disagreed. Hobbes thought the government should keep revolutions to a minimum in order to keep people’s “worst impulses under control” (Austin 94). He believed a strict government would keep everything together. Although, he thought any government was better than the natural state. Consequently, Hobbes’s ideas relies more on a authoritarian government; meanwhile, Locke’s ideas gives more power to the people.
Another difference between Hobbes and Locke would be their views on nature and nurture. Hobbes believes nature has more of an effect on people, while Locke thinks nurture has a bigger effect. Locke believes everyone is born with a blank slate and that people gain knowledge through experience or how they are raised. Locke says “…let him tell me, whether all the original ideas he has there, are any other than of the objects of his senses, or of the operations of his mind…” (102). In other words, ideas humans get are not already in the brain, but are gained through their senses. Hobbes leans toward nature having a bigger effect on people than nurture. Hobbes believes the way people act towards certain things were instilled in them since they were born. The article “’Identical Strangers’ Explore Nature Vs. Nurture” supports Hobbes’s theory. In this article, a set of twins are separated at birth and find each other later in life. When they meet, they find numerous similarities in each other, even though they were raised in a different family. Bernstein, one of the twins, noted that she and her sister have the same basic personality, along with the same taste in music and books. Hence, Locke’s and Hobbes’s opposing viewpoints on nature and nurture add to the list of their numerous differences.
Meanwhile, Hobbes and Locke have these many differences, they share one similarity: some form of government is needed.
Hobbes preferred a strict government. Even though “…any form of government was preferable to it [the state of nature]” (Austin 94). Hobbes had more of a negative view on things which is why he believed a strong government was needed. On the other hand, Locke was more positive. In Locke’s theory, he mentions the government when describing the two-way contract, which shows he does believe some form of government is necessary. But Locke wasn’t headstrong about the idea of having a government, let alone such a strict government like Hobbes desired. Accordingly, Hobbes and Locke both agreed that a government is needed for a society to function.
Therefore, without question Hobbes and Locke have differences, Hobbes’s more pessimistic view proves that. They disagree when it comes to their views on the state of nature, revolutions, and if nature or nurture has a bigger effect on people. Although, they both agree people need a government. Their theories differ greatly, which proves Hobbes and Locke are opposites, but they both realize certain things are necessary for a society to function
properly.