Preview

State of Nature: Hobbes and Locke

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
795 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
State of Nature: Hobbes and Locke
John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, more Locke than Hobbes however, have been enormous influential political philosophers for the modern political thought and development of England and the Americas. The topic and phrase “state of nature” is used and discussed significantly throughout. The similarities are shown extensively, but there are many differing views of opinion as well. While they both discuss how the state of nature is dangerous, Hobbes is more pessimistic, where Locke, on the other hand, discusses the potential benefits. Furthermore, Hobbes speaks about the state of nature as a hypothetical and Locke demonstrates shows us examples of where it truly exists.

The one great and outstanding similarity between Thomas Hobbes’ state of nature and John Locke’s state of nature is that they both discuss how dangerous a state of nature can actually be. Both suggest that men are equals in this state with Hobbes stating “Nature hath made men so equal, in the faculties of body and mind, as that though there be found one man sometimes manifestly stronger in body, or of quicker mind than another; yet when all is reckoned together, the difference between man and man is not so considerable.” Likewise, Locke describes this nature as a “state of perfect equality, where naturally there is no superiority or jurisdiction of one over another.” Despite thinking alike in this regard, however, Locke and Hobbes warn of the risk of the state of nature. As was thoroughly discussed in class and made very apparent, the entire time Hobbes has man in a state of nature, he (man) is in a state of war. Hobbes so states, “if any two men cannot enjoy the same thing, they become enemies and in the way to their end…endeavor to destroy or subdue one another.” Similarly, Locke points out these risks, saying that without the “law of nature,” man may make decisions that lead to a state of war. To review, both men mention the dangers of the state or nature, and the states of war that are

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • 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
  • 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

    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
  • Powerful Essays

    1. Locks justification of private property can be summed by stating, the earth and all it possess is property to be used by people in common for their own benefit and existence. In Locke's view, every individual must have private property rights In order to possess the property in common. To Locke, property also justifies and gives authority in terms of wages, land, and labor. Also in order to be justified, and individual must not possess more property then can be used for his benefit. This comes about from his dislike of authoritarianism both on the individual, community, and religious levels. Locke dictates that we have a natural right as humans to everything common i.e.: water, air, life liberty and property, (the earth and everything in it is considered property). Everything within the earth is considered commons until labor converts it to private property. But that being said Locke does give limits to private property. Privatization is limited by needs, we must leave enough, and as good for those who need it (though the accumulation of wealth to Locke is a natural right). In other words lock views waste as immoral and the limit of privatization. Other immoral acts to Locke include degrading the commons, and depriving others of their natural right of commons. Today, we have overcome these limits by having a huge income inequality, polluting our world through industry, and by not making full use of property. We degrade our commons through dumping, and polluting our air through industry, and we pass bills to let corporations get away with it easier. That goes the same for the other two; currently we pass legislation that helps corporations exceed Locks natural limits to property.…

    • 2091 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful 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
  • 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

    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

    Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were to philosophers with opposing opinions on human nature and the state of nature. Locke saw humanity and life with optimism and community, whereas Hobbes only thought of humans as being capable of living a more violent, self-interested lifestyle which would lead to civil unrest. However, both can agree that in order for either way of life to achieve success there must be a sovereign.…

    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In an effort to reimagine politics and diverge from the fanciful teachings of the ancients, three optimistic realists emerged to begin a philosophical revolution. The garden of modern politics was begun by Machiavelli who cleared the land of the stones of antiquated virtue and tilled the soil. Then came Hobbes, who added the fertilizer of enlightened self-interest, the water of reason, and the seeds of human nature. Finally came Locke who, upon seeing that Hobbes’ seeds had grown into weeds of despotic monarchy, ripped them from the ground and replaced them with the seeds of liberalism. What Locke viewed as weeds, Hobbes viewed as the form of government most conducive to stability and peace. Locke’s Second Treatise of Government provides an argument against absolute hereditary monarchies while exalting liberalism as the paradigm of politics.…

    • 1565 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    That men are sinister in the State of Nature could be promoted as a headline to Hobbes’s magnum opus, Leviathan. In the state of nature, men are not magnanimous beings. A notion similar to the first sin, yet different from a philosopher like Jean Jacque Rousseau. It has always been taken for granted that there are wicked and virtuous humans, yet for Hobbes, humans are innately wicked. These notions, however abstract and contradictory they may seem, are demonstrated in this short paper; Hobbes’s chapter 13 of Leviathan is abridged in this paper. First, the inclinations that drive men to behave in a wicked way are outlined step by step. Then Hobbes’s reason for having a common power is established. Generally, this paper is a reflection on Chapter 13 of Leviathan with explanation and commentary.…

    • 1395 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Locke Vs Hobbes

    • 508 Words
    • 3 Pages

    John Locke also believed in the social contract and the state of nature, but he opposed Hobbes’s position on these issues. Locke thought people could live in peace in the state of nature, because everyone was equal and had a conscience to guide them. Locke disagreed with Hobbes’s assumption that the state of war and the state of nature were the same. He felt that people could go without a leader by using reason in its place. The state of war would only occur when they tried to force things on each other. Locke thought that when that happened people had the right to wage war, as an act of…

    • 508 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    John Locke and Thomas Hobbes were two important philosophers from the seventeenth century. The two were born nearly 50 years apart – Hobbes in 1588 and Locke in 1632 – and yet, they each managed to have a major impact on their time and our own. The philosophical viewpoints of Locke and Hobbes are, in most cases, in strict opposition of each other. There are certain points at which the theories of both men collide; however, their synonymous beliefs are exactly the point at which their theories begin to diverge again.…

    • 1074 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    State of Nature In the state of nature, Locke speaks of the natural instincts of human beings as a way of defining political power. He describes the state of nature…

    • 994 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Hobbes' Leviathan and Locke's Second Treatise of Government comprise critical works in the lexicon of political science theory. Both works expound on the origins and purpose of civil society and government. Hobbes' and Locke's writings center on the definition of the "state of nature" and the best means by which a society develops a systemic format from this beginning. The authors hold opposing views as to how man fits into the state of nature and the means by which a government should be formed and what type of government constitutes the best. This difference arises from different conceptions about human nature and "the state of nature", a condition in which the human race finds itself prior to uniting into civil society. Hobbes' Leviathan goes on to propose a system of power that rests with an absolute or omnipotent sovereign, while Locke, in his Treatise, provides for a government responsible to its citizenry with limitations on the ruler's powers. The understanding of the state of nature is essential to both theorists' discussions. For Hobbes, the state of nature is equivalent to a state of war. Locke's description of the state of nature is more complex: initially the state of nature is one of "peace, goodwill, mutual assistance and preservation". Transgressions against the law of nature, or reason which "teaches mankind that all being equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty and possessions," are but few. The state of nature, according to Locke's Treatise, consists of the society of man, distinct from political society, live together without any superior authority to restrict and judge their actions. It is when man begins to acquire property that the state of nature becomes somewhat less peaceful. At an undetermined point in the history of man, a people, while still in the state of nature, allowed one person to become their leader and judge over controversies. This was first the patriarch of a…

    • 3013 Words
    • 87 Pages
    Powerful 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