Preview

“Life in a State of Nature Would Be Awful.” Assess and Evaluate This View.

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1094 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
“Life in a State of Nature Would Be Awful.” Assess and Evaluate This View.
A state of nature; a life where no governable state exists and no one possesses political power. ‘Why do we not live in a state of nature?’ some may ask. Why must we be under the government’s power? The first step in understanding why we have something, like the government, is to consider what life would be like without it. There has been many different concepts over time as to what a ‘state of nature’ really is and if life really would be awful without it. Initially, Hobbes believed that in a state of nature, all men would turn ‘nasty and brutish’ and life would turn into a never-ending cycle of crime and war as there would be no one there to stop us. On the contrary, Locke believed that man would be content in a state of nature, that life would be the opposite of awful and we would act morally towards each other due to the social contract. Thirdly, Rousseau thought that if we ever found ourselves in a state of nature, men would turn to savages, but would be happy with it.
In actual fact we are very unlikely to experience a state of nature in our lifetime, so the most we can do is to just imagine. In support of Hobbes’s view, no one, no police would be there to stop us from doing whatever it takes to experience total happiness. For example, if we desperately needed money, no one could stop us from committing fraud or robbing a bank in order to get what we want. However, it may work when we think about it in our own perspective, but imagine what you would do in a state of nature, and times it by 7 billion. The imagery you now have in your head is most likely chaotic and out of control. This is the exact reason why Hobbes was so against a state of nature. In Hobbes’s most famous piece of work, ‘the leviathan’, he wrote that in a man’s natural state, “the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short...The condition of man...is a condition of war of everyone against everyone.” This leads us to believe that life in a state of nature, with no rules, morality

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    In Leviathan, the state of nature is a public without government. There are no agencies to recognize authority or to judge disputes, and there is no power to be enforced. There cannot be injustice or personal property because there are no laws. It is the state where humans are equal in body and mind, no one is invincible…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    According to Rousseau, in the state of nature, people tended to be isolated, war was absent, and their desires were minimal and circumscribed (i.e., commensurate with their basic survival needs). People did not have the drive to acquire more possessions. There was plenty to go around, an absence of reliance on others, and no real need for extensive social interaction. However, there did exist an unreflective sympathy and general compassion toward others that was indiscriminate and not based on merits.…

    • 2956 Words
    • 12 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
  • Good Essays

    A state of nature is not a place, but rather a condition in which no government exists. The idea of state of nature was created by philosopher John Locke, which is relevant to the kids on the island from Lord of the flies. Lord of the flies is a movie about kids who were in a plane crash and landed on an island. They began to make a democracy and government, but they changed into an anarchy because the rules were not followed. John Locke would have been ashamed of life on the island because the rights of life, liberty, and property were not respected.…

    • 764 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    1ST PARAGRAPH - What did Locke think would happen without government? A State of Nature is a society without government or laws. Locke believed when men became overpopulated enough to the point where land becomes scarce, then men needed law beyond the natural law.…

    • 865 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    When it comes to State of Nature, Locke writes in his Two Treatises of Government,“...a state of perfect freedom of acting and disposing of their own possessions and persons as they think fit within the bounds of the law of nature...The natural state is also one of equality in which all power and jurisdiction is reciprocal...” (Lonang Institute; State of Nature §4). Men are freely allowed to do whatever is necessary as long as there are justifications for their actions and to see that everyone around them is just as equal as themselves. Along with his State of Nature is Locke’s belief of Social Contact: “individuals in a state of nature would be bound morally, by the Law of Nature, not to harm each other in their lives or possession… individuals would agree to form a state that would provide a "neutral judge"...an impartial, objective agent of that self-defense, rather than each man acting as his own judge, jury, and executioner...”(Social Contract-Wikipedia). In other terms, man must form a government that they entrust their lives with by giving them support and power, and in return, the government must protect the people from hurting one another by being the objective factor in the justice system. Finally, in the State of Man, Locke claims that “at birth, the mind was a blank slate or “tabula rasa”... born without innate ideas, and that…

    • 1757 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    “Life in the state of nature is insecure because without government there is no single authority to determine what the law of nature demands and to enforce those demands. All men being equal, each is entitled to enforce the law of nature and to punish transgressors. Locke thought that the disadvantages of this are obvious: men's…

    • 829 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Phil 103 Final

    • 1037 Words
    • 3 Pages

    1D. The state of nature is Hobbes’ description of what human beings lived like prior to the existence of a state or civilized society. In this existence, all humans were equal in that they all wanted to achieve their ultimate end and they all had the right to do what they thought necessary for survival…

    • 1037 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes was a philosopher who saw humans as a purely physical being. He believed that all human actions can be explained through the motions in our bodies. According to Hobbes all feelings and emotions are a result of phantasms, our perception of the objects around us. This perception is a motion within our bodies and each person perceives these phantasms differently causing love, hate, desires, and what we think is good and bad. Every feeling that comes from ones perspective has a physical feeling, such as desires can cause certain pains and it is only human nature that one does whatever is needed in order to relieve those pains. Hobbes therefore sees humans as being able, by their state of nature, to take or do whatever necessary for themselves even if it shows no regard for the other people their actions may harm. This inevitably would end up in a fight for survival or “the war of all against all”. In order to prevent such a war from happening Hobbes thought it necessary that the individuals must promise each other to give up their right to govern themselves to the sovereign for the mutual benefit of the people. This sovereign then has absolute power to rule with no questions asked and not to only act on behalf of the citizens but to completely embody their will. In summation, Hobbes believed that society could only exist under power of the sovereign and that life in the state of nature is violent, short and brutish, as all men act on self-interest.…

    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    It is a brutish and violent nature. In the absence of culture, arts, science, reading or writing, humans, possibly, are more related to animals, since animals also live in the state of nature, and who always fight for domination. This rather negative view is Hobbe’s main reason why there should be a government. There should be an authority to establish peace. In peace, numerous achievements can be obtained. In peace does humanity progress. It might be argued that Hobbes demands a despot, an autocracy. Still, is not that better than the state of nature? There might be many opposing arguments especially that of the anarchists, yet Hobbe’s examples might not be conquered because they are succinct and feasible. They are plausibly impregnable because they are factual, not idealist. Leviathan does convincingly argue, and this monster in the state of nature does devour…

    • 1395 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Second Treatise of Government by John Locke focuses on the transformation of society from a state of nature to a civil government. The state of nature according to Locke has perfect freedom and individuals govern by reason, whereas a civil government has an established legislative and executive power that has authority. To understand the Treatise on of the very first chapters, titled “The State of Nature”, discusses how men behave in without the legislative and executive powers, or in a sense how they govern themselves. This chapter begins with the idea that all men are born in a perfect freedom and on an equal standing, in which no individual is born with a higher advantage compared to that of another.…

    • 806 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Democratic Answer

    • 687 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Living in the state of nature is like a king with a kingdom, the king has whatever he wants and will take anything he wants. As king he is always trying to defend what is his because of what the state of nature is. State of nature allows people to do whatever they want without there being a right or wrong. The state of nature is also when people are biased and ignorant, especially when it is something concerning themselves. Lastly, men living in the state nature will try to cover their wrong doings with the thought of it being good. This means that people could kill someone because there is no law saying that it is right or wrong and they will do it because it is the easiest way to solve a problem and justify it. This is why the king will give up his kingdom in order for security of his life and the protection of his things by letting go of some of his powers and joining a community. Making promulgated laws and laws for the rich and the poor would help people not want to take from each other because the poor and the rich people will have direction in what to do to in both society levels. Then the second obligation is that the laws be made for the good of the people, everyone will be able to receive different types of aid to ultimately better their lives, which would lead to more peace. Next, the government shall not raise taxes without the peoples consent is beneficial because it not only involves the people but it shows that the government does care about what the people want do not want. Lastly, the government may not give the legislative powers to anyone one or anywhere else. This obligation makes the extent of legislative power valuable because this pprotects the people…

    • 687 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The things that drive men towards wanting peace are fear of death, desire to live peacefully, and the possibility of getting that standard of life. In the state of nature, there is no common power and Hobbes states that all individuals are fundamentally equal in that everyone is capable of killing or harming another individual. There is no peace and the risk of death is constant. Life without laws and before a civil society is defined by a constant state of war and general chaos. In the state of nature, every man has a right to everything. The existence or potential existence of this condition means that there is absolutely no guarantee that individuals can preserve themselves. When in a state of war, "there is no place for industry, because…

    • 402 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The state of nature according to Locke is “a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit... without asking leave or depending upon the will of any other man.” For Locke, the state of nature is where humans exist without an established government or social contract. In a since the state of nature is a state of anarchy, of no order. What John Locke believed about the state of nature was that if men could act in a positive way, they could reach order without being absolutely controlled by one person. The state of nature is a state of liberty where persons are free to pursue their own interests and plans, free from interference. People act according to "laws of nature" which include moral equality and natural freedom. Society can exist and stay civil as long as people can work together to protect themselves and each other from those who do not obey the laws of nature. In the law of nature, natural moral principles that people are naturally inclined towards are implemented. The basic laws stated in the law of nature were that man is God's property, therefore one has the right to defend oneself from harm. It also stated that one has the duty to protect others from harm, therefore one is also obligated to punish those who cause harm. These views of the law of nature are partly stemmed from Locke’s belief in God and His creation of man and all things on Earth.…

    • 472 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    On the one hand the state is a necessary evil. According to Hobbes the state of nature is the state of licence, where everyone can kill anyone and it is terrible so the state is necessary. Hobbes describes this state as 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short'. Hobbes said that individuals consent to give their rights and licence up to the state in order to get stability because the state will be their ‘night watchman’, as Ferdinand Lassalle referred to the minimal liberal bourgeois state in one of his speeches (although Hobbes did not believe that the state should necessarily be reduced to this form, he accepted that the state can be coercive and dominant). Hobbes claims that in the state of nature most effort would be spent by individuals in protecting themselves and their rights, according to this reasoning a good type of defence is offence, e.g. kill or be killed, making individuals in the state of nature more prone to violence. Since according to Hobbes in the state of nature people are preoccupied with protecting themselves and also since there are no guarantees of protection of property and rights, there would be no point in progress and hence no progress. For example industrial progress would't be happening because why build a factory if it can be taken away or destroyed the next…

    • 1989 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful Essays