Compare And Contrast Hobbes And Locke's View On The State Of Nature

1103 Words5 Pages
John Stuart MILL feel as if humans should use the distinctive features of their species, such as reason and morality, thus continuing nature while transforming it. Mill wants everyone to go with the flow of nature and make changes as needed. Thus as Hobbes feels as if the state of nature is a state of war. He feels that everyone lives in fear all the time. Because of this, Hobbes feels as if no one truly has any freedom. However, since even the weakest follower could kill the strongest leader all men are ranked the same, no morality exist. They have two different perspectives on nature, however Locke doesn’t agree with either of them. Locke believes that men exist in the state of nature as each other in perfect freedom to do as they please.…show more content…
And they yelled “crucify him", this example goes to show the position of Hobbes state of nature. Thomas Hobbes kinda makes it seem like he agree’s with civilization early on, how cavemen had to literally kill to eat and survive. No moraliity exist in hobbes eye’s because if you show morality you underestimating your oppenent. It’s quite possible that the weakest momst poorest man or citizen can kill the most strongest, richest, most succesful man or most powerful leader, there is no scale every man is created equal. It’s because of this that he beleives that government are to help keep peace, impose law and order, and the prevention of war. Thomas Hobbes feels as if governments are made to controll citizens and not necesarily represent citizens. This is why it’s important for the government to have a strong, dicipline, and thearal leader. If your citizens or people you represent think that you’ll do whatever you want them to do then they will feel like they have control over you and you lose power and respect when no one takes you serious. Locke comes to realize that he believes that governments are made to represent
Open Document