Comparing Thomas Hobbes And John Locke

587 Words3 Pages
I prefer Thomas Hobbes point of view and argument opposed to John Locke’s view. Thomas Hobbes believed in one absolute power to calm the original state of violent people. He believed in reason and law of nature that would replace customs and traditional faith. Since Hobbes argued by reason, regardless what religion you were a part of, you would be compelled to agree. Hobbes starts off by saying that all men are roughly equal in nature. Therefore, men are also equal in desires & hopes. Everyone is striving towards the same goals, thus everyone is a threat to everyone. This creates insecurity, war, and violence. Hobbes states that the life of a man is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, & short”. According to Hobbes, the only way out of this…show more content…
It is a deal among the people to set up the sovereign. The sovereign is an artificial person containing or unifying all the individual wills. If everyone did this, not only would it reduce violence, it would also create unity among the multitude called a commonwealth. There would no longer be competition among men. Perhaps, the people would learn to work together instead of against each other to survive. In contrast, Locke believed that people are born with certain natural rights, and it is the government’s job to protect them. People have the power to overthrow the government if they fail to do this. Locke believe that the mind is like a blank state and ideas and knowledge are shaped by one’s environment and experience. The contract is between the people and the judge or government. Whereas, Hobbes believed that it is first an agreement among the people then it is transferred to the sovereign. This seems more practical because the people work together and agree to transfer their rights to the sovereign. Also, Locke believed humans are naturally fairly pleasant, but Hobbes believed that humans were naturally awful. It seems wrong that humans are naturally pleasant, because if they were they would work together to hunt and build a strong community and society. But that does not seem to work. It seems that more often humans fight for food to survive and are more focused on
Show More
Related

  • Good And Evil In William Golding's Lord Of The Flies

    1275 Words  | 6 Pages

    good and evil. There is often uncertainty over where one becomes the other and many question the existence of the two states altogether, believing that humans are either intrinsically good or evil. Philosophers and authors alike, such as Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, have pondered this question, yet it remains unanswered. Although William Golding and Kahlil Gibran address the existence of good and evil in humans in their respective works, Golding emphasizes the transition from good to evil in Lord

    Read More

  • Leibniz's Theory Of Space, Time And Motion

    2905 Words  | 12 Pages

    INTRODUCTION: Space, Time and motion were three interrelated concepts which have been very difficult by the philosophers to arrive at a proper understanding since the ancient times. By there has been consensus that a proper understanding of motion would lend a hand in addressing the questions on the nature of the other two concepts namely space and time. Depending on the nature of approach to the problem of space and time, the philosophers mainly addressed three key concerns. They are as follows:

    Read More

More about Comparing Thomas Hobbes And John Locke

Open Document