Since resources are scarce, humankind is naturally competitive, inevitably creating jealousy and hatred, which eventually leads to war. The constant state of war is what Hobbes believes to be man’s original state of nature. According to Hobbes, man cannot be trusted in the state of nature. War among men is consequent and nothing can be unjust. Notions of justice and injustice or right and wrong will not hav... ... middle of paper ... ...ons on what kind of government should prevail within a society in order for it to function properly.
In the Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes has many different things to say about human nature and what drives men to commit certain actions. All of the actions committed by men and Thomas Hobbes theories revolve around two central ideas, competition and desire. And because of competition and desire, people can never reach true happiness. Man’s own desires and need to be better than the next person will stop true happiness. But in order to understand why Hobbes believes this, his view on human nature has to be looked at first.
The natural state of man is how mankind would act if there were no one restraining them with their power, in other words, no government ruling over them. If there were no governing body of man it would be a “war of all against all” (69). This means that all men would be battling each other for their own interests and their quest for power. Hobbes then says that this state of nature is not sustainable, but rather that it is “nasty, brutish, and short” (70). In order to avoid the downfalls
Machiavelli does not trust nor believe in human reason. He was sarcastic and satirical towards the very thought of human reason, which allows us to interpret that he was mocking the people of his time. In The Prince, Machiavelli expressed what the ideal Prince should embody, what he should do in times of war, what he should do for the economy daily, and how to rule in times of peace as well. Human nature to him however, is described as, rude, pessimistic, and shallow. Machiavelli makes it evidently clear that, “Men are much more taken by present than by past things, and when they find themselves well-off in the present, they enjoy it and see... ... middle of paper ... ...ciety must trust in human nature because it required a collective effort from everyone in the economy.
While Thomas Hobbes believed that all people were wicked only fighting for their own interests, John Locke believed that person were naturally good and once they were born, they were empty slates which makes them learn from their experiences instead of just being outright evil. John Locke believed in democracy because if a government is like an absolute monarch, it won’t satisfy all the needs of the people and this is why the people have a right to revolt against an abusive government as proven in the American Revolutionary War with King George III or the French Revolutionary War with King Louis XVI who didn 't support their citizen’s ideas and goals. Thomas Hobbes believed that people couldn 't be trusted because they would only fight for their own interests, so an absolute monarch would demand obedience to maintain order, but John Locke States that people can be trusted since all people are naturally good but depending on our experiences as they can still govern themselves. The Purpose of the government, according to John Locke is to protect the individual liberties and rights instead of just keeping law and order because with law and order being put strictly, the people would rebel because it didn’t represent them and then the country will collapse because the king was too
He compares the state of nature to a state of constant war, long term community was impossible. (Hobbes p. 3) In this state men would fight each other because of competition over resources, fear and self-preservation, as well as for personal glory. (Hobbes, p. 3) According to Hobbes, even though man desires things like praise, in the state of nature “men have no pleasure (but on the contrary a great deal of grief) in keeping company where there is no power able to overawe them all.” (Hobbes. P 3) Without some greater power to enforce order, there can could be no trust in the state of nature, and therefore no community; man would live in a state of isolation. Hobbes wouldn’t say that all men couldn’t be trusted.
“Society everywhere is in conspiracy against the manhood of every one of its members.“ In other words, in order to be a part of something, particularly in this case the society, man has lost his individual identity. Thus, concludes Emerson, man is dependent on others for his own identity. Emerson obviously believes that man should not settle for becoming what society has already prescribed for him. It is apparent that he feels that too often we are smothered by what other people believe and think and lose sight of the fact that we all have minds of our own and we should not fear independence. By letting yourself conform to what society believes or by living yo... ... middle of paper ... ...s life was to teach us for not making compromises just in order to fit in.
Again, Machiavelli swerves away from the path that many thinkers would take at this point. Instead of launching a criticism of m... ... middle of paper ... ...nocent on all counts of breaking campaign promises, selling out allies, misleading voters, and doing something right for the wrong reasons. Sure, the world would be a better place if all men acted like men (and not beasts), but since at least some will act like beasts, then anyone who wants to succeed must also be willing to act like a beast if necessary. ?For a man who wants to make a profession of good in all regards must come to ruin among so many who are no good.? (Machiavelli, p. 61).
Rousseau theorized that the “savage” in the state of nature was not selfish, like Hobbes idea, but rather it arose as a result from the person’s interaction with society. He argued that people naturally have compassion for others who are suffering and that the civil society encourages us to believe we are superior to others. Therefore, the thought of being more powerful will cause us to suppress our virtuous feelings of kindness and instead change us into selfish humans. Both philosophers agreed that humans are naturally self-interested, however, Rousseau fails to understand the concept that there are insufficient resources for every human and that brutal competition is part of survival. When discussing Rousseau’s theory on the corruption of society, an interesting question arises.
This made him one of the most hated men because his ideas were considered too modern and extremely dangerous. According to Hobbes, he had three opinions on human nature. The first is that we are all self-interested, driven by power, greed, and vainglory. The second is that we are all capable of using reason. The last point he made is that we are all more or less equal; in terms of physical needs and we are vulnerable to those needs.