Locke’s ideal state is one of which man has “perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions as they think fit… without depending upon the will of another man” (365). He unifies man under his God, who he believes has provided mankind with morality within the laws of nature, which prevents a world as heinous as that of Hobbes. Unlike Hobbes but similar to Rousseau, Locke rejects an all powerful sovereign to rule over people, stating that having a sovereign would not provide a much better life than that within the chaotic state of nature because there is no civil liberty to question or control an ill willed leader. He also claims sovereign's wills are “inconstant, uncertain, unknown, and arbitrary” (369). Locke’s solution for the emergence of a civil society is to establish an indirect democracy where there is a centralized governing body of people who decide on behalf of the people in account with the laws of nature.
He further elaborates by saying, “ The only obligation, which I have the right to assume is to do at anytime what I think is right”(Thoreau 387). Thoreau places critical thinking and principle over blindly following what is dictated by the government. By taking control of their will, men make it impossible to be governed unjustly and can bring about a more just society. This reliance on themselves to know what is righ... ... middle of paper ... ...action. These are the men who prevent society from progressing because they refuse to take a stand.
Human Beings are forlorn Sartre argument is basically him saying that we choose to be who we are. That man has freedom to do what they please. Human beings can re-create ourselves, and choose what meaning life has. Sartre basically says that we are responsible for our own actions, because man is free. Man cannot blame morals or society for what actions man does.
(188) Therefore the accepted rules of conduct to follow, principles of ethics and our interpretation of morality would not exist. The principals of Good & Evil would be subjective, left to the interpretation of each person. According to Hobbes the catalyst for the process of an absolute power would not be because it is right & just to keep war at bay, but because man has an intrinsic desire to live. Man fueled by his own self interests and capable of reason will see an absolute power, (as every man is naturally equal), as the only way to preserve himself. For it is the “general rule of reason, that every man ought to endeavour peace” (190) It is in man’s self-interest to follow the laws of nature and to willingly give up all of his rights in order to secure his or her safety & preserve his or hers way of life, as long as all other’s do the same.
The fact is that man lives by only one rule: to preserve the right to preserve. Man lives to kill or be killed. Every man acts as a singular body that has the duty to preserve his own successful end means. Freedom is an obligation to preserve and defend yo... ... middle of paper ... ... These ideas Hobbes presents explain why his account of human nature is deeply pessimistic of man.
Sartre's existentialism is a philosophy, which deals with man. It states that man is that which he makes of himself and that he has to make his own choices in a state of anguish. Man chooses in anguish, because he has no external guidelines to help him and must rely on his own morals and beliefs. Man chooses completely want he wants to do. His existence depends on this.
While Blatchford stressed that predicting a person's actions proves the non existence of free will . ( 105 ) However, Stace contrverted that there are both free and unfree will acts (112) but I disapprove with all the previous theories because my religious upbringing allows me to believe that free will determines our destiny. Philosophers like Mill believe that a person's environment is the major shaper of his character . He believes that everything around the person affects his personality in some way or another and thereby directing his actions to reach a certain goal previously identified for him. He believes that a person has little power over forming his own character , since his character is formed by the circumstances surrounding him and since one of these circumstances is his desire to change .
Ayn Rand says, ¨A man thinks and works alone. A man cannot rob, exploit, or rule -alone(...) they imply dependence and are the province of the second-hander.¨ Equality thinks and acts in his own way, rebelling against everything he’s ever known. His struggle is real, from being beaten until he is numb to harsh words thrown his way, but no matter what happens to him, he thinks about what could benefit the future and give men the rights that should have never been taken from
Jean Paul Sartre is a philosopher that supports the philosophy of existentialism. Existentialism is a twentieth century philosophy that denies any crucial human nature and embraces that each of us produces our own essence through our free actions. Existentialists like Sartre believe there isn’t a God that determines people’s nature. So, existentialists believe that humans have no purpose or nature except the ones that they create for themselves. We are free and responsible for what we are and our engagements; even though we are mindful that this can cause agony.
However, man cannot give up his right to defend himself, for the entire purpose of entering the contract is self-preservation. Once the contract is formed, one must obey Hobbes’ third law of nature, which is to adhere to the contract (Leviathan 1, 14)... ... middle of paper ... ... which are not meant to relieve guilt, or gain the favor of another, but simply because a man will feel better by helping another. This is an act based on maximizing one’s own utility, even if it is merely in his own mind. To those for whom morality and helping the greater good is important, altruistic acts exist even it is within the category of selfish acts. Thus, Hobbes’ theory concerning actions based solely on self-serving motivations is not truly complete.