Thomas Hobbes And John Locke's View Of Human Nature

1108 Words3 Pages

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke both have theories of human nature, but have very differentiating views of what life is like for humans in this state of nature before any civil society or government authority. Hobbes has a very negative view of human nature while Locke has a very positive outlook on human nature. The two different views have lead to many critiques about which theory may be stronger. Thomas Hobbes has a pessimistic view of human nature. He believes that without outside laws or government (in the sate of nature) humans are awful and destructive creatures. He theorizes that in a natural state men are essentially created as equals, even if one man may seem more physically fit or more mentally capable than another. He believes that
But the problem with seeking peace in a natural state is that one will not know if they can trust everyone else. Men don 't know right from wrong in the state of nature since there is no law to govern their actions. With out an common power to fear humans live in a state of constant fear for their lives (Leviathan, 77). Hobbes views the conditions in the state of nature, which is ultimately a state of war, as, “Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Leviathan, 77). In this state of nature humans have a very individualistic way of living, only thinking of how they can stay alive and not thinking of the greater or common
He believes that humans could have once lived in a state of nature with out government peacefully, because humans are innately rational and reasonable beings. Men are created as equals by “God” or an “intelligent being” (Second Treatise of Government, 107). Since men are created as equals, in a state of nature no man has power over anyone else and everyone is free to do as they please, as long as they stay in the limits created by the laws of nature (Second Treatise of Government, 106). Locke believes that humans have a natural right to life, health, property, and fair punishment for those who infringe on our rights. He thinks that one should respect their own rights and the rights of everyone else equally. Locke believes that men are naturally in this state of nature until they agree to join a political society, which would help them to avoid a state of war (Second treatise of Government, 110). A state of war will emerge when another man threatens another’s life or other natural rights, thus causing him to go into a state of conflict and war with this person. Hobbes and Locke both have very different views of what life would be like for humans in the state of nature. I find Hobbes’s argument of human nature to be stronger than Locke’s argument. I think that he offers much more detail and background evidence to his theory of human

Open Document