Show MoreHobbes and Locke’s each have different ideologies of man’s state of nature that develops their ideal form of government. They do however have similar ideas, such as how man is born with a perfect state of equality that is before any form of government and social contract. Scarcity of goods ultimately leads to Hobbes and Locke’s different states of nature that shapes their two different ideal governments because Hobbes believes that scarcity of goods will bring about a constant state of war, competition, and greed of man that cannot be controlled without a absolute sovereign as government while Locke believes that with reasoning and a unified government, man will succeed in self preservation of himself and others.…show more content…
Locke’s view is that man can self preserve with his use of reasoning. He believes that man uses his reason to not engage in a constant state of war. Locke would say that man has the rights to protect his property and what he has, but because of his reason he will not constantly go after other people’s property and engage in a state of war and will therefore attempt to coexist peacefully. Also if there is an abundance of goods, man will use reason to not go after another man or his property because he has enough for his own self-preservation. Hobbes belief of an absolute sovereign and Locke’s belief in a unified government is shaped by their different views of man’s state of nature. Hobbes states there is a need of an absolute sovereign as government because of man’s state of nature, which is a constant state of war. This state of war entails men who act as beasts because they follow instincts based on greed, competition, and brutish methods of self-preservation. These characteristics are the basis of man being in that state of nature, which is essentially brought upon by the scarcity of goods. Since man feels there is scarcity of goods, his thoughts of greed and competition will over take him and lead to a state of life that is nasty and full of violence. Hobbes says that without an intense and strict form of government, man cannot coexist peacefully because they will be under conditions of constant fear of
Show MoreThomas Hobbes and John Locke are two political philosophers who are famous for their theories about the formation of the society and discussing man in his natural state.
Their theories are both psychologically insightful, but in nature, they are drastically different. Although they lived in the same timeframe, their ideas were derived from different events happening during this time. Hobbes drew his ideas on man from observation, during a time of civil strife in Europe during the 1640's and 1650's. Locke drew his ideas from a time where Hobbes did not have the chance to observe the, glorious revolution. In uncivilized times, in times before government, Hobbes asserted the existence of continual war with "every man, against every man."…show more content…
This convention holds in our society and is revealed through in everyday items such as keys. We lock our cars and houses so that others are physically prevented from having access to what is ours, an observation Hobbes himself makes. Control, security and limitation are encountered in each person?s daily life. Behind this control is politics. In our society, authority decides what is right and wrong, good and evil; essentially what we are protected against and what we are not.
John Locke kept more optimistic beliefs. In the state of nature men mostly kept their promises and honored their obligations, and believed man is reasonable rather than selfish as according to Hobbes. Locke maintained that the original state of nature was happy and characterized by reason and tolerance. He further maintained that all human beings, in their natural state, were equal and free to pursue life, health, liberty, and possessions; and that these were inalienable rights.
He stated that men in its nature are independent and equal and the reason for why person will join the society is the willingness to avoid the conflicts and war that will provide the security for this person. Humans know what is right and wrong, and are capable of knowing what is lawful and unlawful well enough to resolve conflicts. In particular, and most importantly, they are capable of telling the difference between what is theirs and what belongs to someone else.