Society and Government
analytical Essay
1858 words
Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan and John Locke’s Two Treatises of Government have produced two definitive and vastly different theories of government. Though both philosophers seem to be embedded in the concept of a natural law, why do Hobbes and Locke seem to come to two opposing conclusions about society and government? The answer lies in critical distinctions between their interpretations on the state of nature, including their conjectures on human nature, their perceptions of freedom and equality, and their ultimate reasoning for civil society.
Human nature is an integral part of the state of nature theory. Hobbes’ theorizes that human nature is flawed, with men being naturally selfish and hedonistic: “of the voluntary acts of every man, the object is some Good to himselfe” (Hobbes, 1996, p. 93). This suggests that in a natural state, humans are only guided by their own needs and wants. As a result, Hobbes believes that the only law that governs the state of nature is maintenance of self-preservation. This gives rise to a clashing of desires, which compels man to undermine any concern for others and put oneself above all else.
The extent to which man is able to undermine others for the sake of self-benefit is also limitless according to Hobbes: “in this law of Nature for where no covenant hath preceded, there hath nor Right been transferred and every man had right to everything; and consequently, no action can be Unjust” (Hobbes, 1996, p. 100). There is a clear Hobbesian view of morality that begins to take form. Good and evil seem to be relative to Hobbes. Because of this, each individual in the state of nature has varying perceptions of morality, which often conflict, creating disagreement that only incites violence. This pr...
... middle of paper ...
...have consent in order to act. This essentially gives sovereign power to the people. This philosophy is also consistent with Locke’s favor for a republican structure of government.
The apparent difference seen between the political theories of Hobbes and Locke can be attributed to their differing views on the state of nature. The development of mankind as a selfish being living in a state of war and violently attempting to obtain equality naturally lead Hobbes to conclude that an authoritative power is needed to instill order to chaos. On the other side of the spectrum, Lock molds the state of nature to be a state of peace, and attributing men to Reasonable creatures and consequently creates a representative government where the people hold sovereign power. Essentially, these theories seem are a result of a pessimistic and optimistic framing of nature and humanity.
In this essay, the author
- Explains that thomas hobbes' leviathan and john locke's two treatises of government have produced two definitive and vastly different theories of government.
- Explains that hobbes' theorizes that human nature is flawed, with men being naturally selfish and hedonistic. this suggests that humans are only guided by their own needs and wants.
- Analyzes how hobbes supports the use of an absolute sovereign to establish a concrete verdict of what morality truly is.
- Explains that hobbes' assertion of human nature is rooted in the concept of equality among men. though men are not genetically equal in strength or intelligence, each man is equally susceptible and vulnerable to others in nature.
- Analyzes how hobbes' definition of war refers to the hostility and volatility of man in a state of nature, and the fear and anticipation that accompanies livelihood in such an unpredictable and potentially dangerous environment.
- Compares the views of hobbes and locke on man's natural tendencies.
- Analyzes how locke, similar to hobbes, suggests that there is also equality among men in the state of nature.
- Analyzes how hobbes and locke have dissimilar definitions of freedom within the state of nature. the formation of a civil society contradicts the established description of liberty and liberty.
- Compares locke's explanation of freedom with hobbes'. the law of nature governs three inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property.
- Analyzes how hobbes and locke emphasize the importance of consent in the formation of society.
- Analyzes how locke suggests a system that is polar to hobbes. though the concept of consent is consistent, the defining characteristic can be found in his belief that political power cannot be forced upon others.
- Compares hobbes' and locke's political theories on the state of nature, and argues that both are pessimistic and optimistic about nature and humanity.
Related
- analytical
- Hobbes State Of Governmentanalytical essayOne of the most important foundations of Hobbes political philosophy is his reasoning for the importance of government. Hobbes argues that without the presence of government human life would be unbearable, in fact he even goes as far as to say that without government we would live a life of everlasting war with one another. In this paper I will support Hobbes’ claims as to why government is vital, I will also compare Hobbes’ description of the state of nature to the state of the world today.
In this essay, the author
- Argues that hobbes' political philosophy is based on his reasoning for the importance of government.
- Explains that hobbes believes that in the state of nature there is a perpetual war of all against all, driven by felicity, the continual success of satisfying human desires.
- Analyzes how hobbes defines power as one's present means to obtain some future apparent good. he believes that reputation of power is also power.
- Explains that hobbes believes there is no singular power to regulate people's behavior since there are no law givers, a common power, or an enforcer.
- Explains that hobbes believes that the best way of preserving one's life in the state of nature is to follow the laws of nature.
- Opines that hobbes believes that a state without government is fueled with distrust and war, where people fight for power, gain, safety, and reputation.
930 wordsRead More - Civil War In Thomas Hobbes Leviathananalytical essayIn The Leviathan Thomas Hobbes argues for the establishment of a society that does not contain the elements of its own demise. Hobbes views civil war as a society’s ultimate demise, and the only way to avoid it is for the citizens initially to submit to an absolute political authority. For Hobbes, civil war is inevitable in every type of government except an absolute government. In order to sustain this absolute government, the citizens not only must submit to the absolute political authority, but they must also not partake in activities that actively undermine the absolute political authority’s power. For these reasons, it is clear that Hobbes believes in political obedience and its ability to influence the peace of a society. Furthermore,
In this essay, the author
- Analyzes how hobbes views civil war as a society's ultimate demise and the only way to avoid it is for the citizens to submit to an absolute political authority.
- Analyzes how hobbes describes life in the total absence of government as a condition in which individuals exist with privacy and autonomy.
- Argues that hobbes' state of nature is not an attractive scenario for individuals because the individual would exist in the condition of mere nature as private appetite is the measure of good and evil.
- Analyzes how hobbes' state of nature is pessimistic in its description of innate human nature, but he employs empirical and normative assumptions that cause him to define it in such harsh terms.
- Compares locke's definition of the state of nature with hobbes', arguing that reason is the driving force behind individuals' actions.
- Explains that locke's state of nature describes the rights and responsibilities that exist between individuals in society, but does not take into account any additional characteristics of the individual.
- Analyzes how locke's theory of the state of nature relates directly to his natural law.
1805 wordsRead More - Comparing John Locke and Thomas Hobbesanalytical essayHobbes and Locke consider the formation of government from man’s own nature, whether or not government is formed because man is a social animal or if government is formed to preserve society. According to Locke, man must not "think that all government in the world is the product only of force and violence, and that men live together by no other rules but that of beasts" (page 1). "To understand political powe...
In this essay, the author
- Explains that the formation of government is one of the central themes for both hobbes and locke.
- Analyzes how hobbes focuses on the interactions of man seeking the same goal. in any system of limited resources, the competitor must kill, subdue, supplant, or repel the other.
- Analyzes how hobbes deals with the qualities which man possess, and how they affect a man’s basic nature. charisma combined with military ability causes men to follow others as leaders.
- Opines that nature has made men equal, in the faculties of body, and mind. man tends to see himself as wisest in matters, whether or not others may do things better.
- Explains that hobbes and locke consider the formation of government from man's own nature, whether or not government is formed because man is a social animal or if government exists to preserve society.
- Explains that unlike hobbes, locke applies the term to the idea of reason by saying that if man reasons about the fundamental concerns that government arises to protect life and property, man can come to certain natural conclusions about how they should be protected.
- Analyzes locke's central theme of the distribution of property. everything belongs to mankind in general until a man decides to acquire something from its pure state in nature.
- Explains locke's belief that if someone takes more land than he can use, and it spoils, or allows crops to whither without being picked, they are committing crimes against humanity.
- Analyzes how hobbes points out the basic nature of man's interactions with each other, but he is not saying that man is fundamentally evil.
- Explains that locke focuses on the nature of crime and justice. mankind may not do justice to an offender, take away, or impair the life.
- Analyzes how hobbes compares the laws of nature versus human law. human laws are imposed by men who recognize their natures and freely give up some of their rights so that others will do so.
- Explains locke's state of 'perfect equality', whereby men give up some of their free rights for others of protection and guarantees of safety and property.
- Concludes that a government should protect life and prevent loss of property, but these protections aren't guaranteed. competition and crime are still problems even though governments exist.
1267 wordsRead More - The Influence of Locke and Hobbes on Governmentanalytical essayThomas Hobbes and John Locke have authored two works that have had a significant impact on political philosophy. In the “Leviathan” by Hobbes and “Two Treatises of Government” by Locke, the primary focus was to analyze human nature to determine the most suitable type of government for humankind. They will have confounding results. Hobbes concluded that an unlimited sovereign is the only option, and would offer the most for the people, while for Locke such an idea was without merit. He believed that the government should be limited, ruling under the law, with divided powers, and with continued support from its citizens. With this paper I will argue that Locke had a more realistic approach to identifying the human characteristics that organize people into societies, and is effective in persuading us that a limited government is the best government.
In this essay, the author
- Argues that thomas hobbes and john locke have authored two works that have had a significant impact on political philosophy.
- Explains that thomas hobbes believes that the optimal form of authority is one that has absolute power over its people, consisting of just one person who retains the exclusive ability to oversee and decide on all of society's issues.
- Analyzes hobbes' views on human nature, what the state of nature consists of, and what role morality plays in the leviathan.
- Explains that moral laws, with the principal being that people "ought to endeavour peace" with any means necessary, will not bind in foro externo in the state of nature.
- Analyzes hobbes' view that it would be rational for people to initiate an agreement that would extinguish crippling difficulties. psychological egoism has an important role in this.
- Explains that a strong ruler must come in, seize power, establish an absolute monarchy, and rule with an iron fist over those people that were recently fighting for their lives.
- Analyzes how an organized society forms in which the consequences of not adhering to the rules and regulations of the covenant will be so severe that no one would attempt to violate this contract and disobey the sovereign.
- Explains that the limitless sovereign is justified based on hobbes' views on human nature.
- Analyzes how locke concludes that hobbes' ideas are erroneous and that the ideal government would be limited, decentralized, and rule under the law and operate with separated powers.
- Compares locke's "two treatises of government" and hobbes' apocalyptic version of nature.
- Argues that locke's state of nature allows humanity to govern itself, even when taking into account issues that come with a self-interested body of people.
- Explains that the state of nature, according to locke, is a place without set government, where people have unlimited rights. the people are bound by the natural law.
- Analyzes how papadogiannis 6harm others "in their life, liberty, health, and property" and expect their own rights to be respected. hobbes would argue that the father or mother would kill their neighbor for food.
- Argues that locke's individualism is crucial when he tries to persuade his reader on the importance of a limited government.
- Analyzes locke's argument that an unlimited sovereign is an illogical notion. since the neighbor is innocent, he or she is permitted to defend their life.
- Explains that for a state of war to be avoided, common authority is imperative. citizens will have to part with some of their unlimited rights to this new government.
1741 wordsRead More - Political Philosophyanalytical essayPolitical Philosophy Part One (Question 2) Aristotle, Locke, and Hobbes all place a great deal of importance on the state of nature and how it relates to the origin of political bodies. Each one, however, has a different conception of what a natural state is, and ultimately, this leads to a different conception of what a government should be, based on this natural state. Aristotle’s feelings on the natural state of man is much different than that of modern philosophers and leads to a construction of government in and of itself; government for Hobbes and Locke is a departure from the natural state of man. Aristotle’s emphasis is on the city-state, or the political world as a natural occurrence. He says “every city-state exists by nature, since the first communities do.”
In this essay, the author
- Explains that aristotle, locke, and hobbes all place a great deal of importance on the state of nature and how it relates to the origin of political bodies.
- Analyzes how aristotle's emphasis is on the city-state, or the political world as a natural occurrence.
- Compares hobbes' and locke's conceptions of the natural world, arguing that the nature of man is the idea of self-preservation and the preservation of human life.
- Compares hobbes and locke on the isolationist state of nature, while aristotle incorporates all facets of life into his idea of a political animal.
- Argues that rousseau's idea of government is that people give up their physical independence in order to gain moral freedom.
- Argues that burke's conception of philosophers is that their abstraction is irrational. burke believes that nothing can truly be abstract which succeeds because everything must be based on something else.
1755 wordsRead More - Absolute Government Essayanalytical essayHobbes’s government is impossible, firstly, because people have no arbitrary power to transfer. Secondly, a government that is not bound by laws is no government at all since it remains in a state of nature with its citizens. Lastly, the Hobbesian sovereign’s right to take away his subjects’ property makes the establishment of this form of government incongruous because the purpose of the government is the protection of property. Absolute arbitrary government comes about only when the government exceeds its authority and is not something that should be strived for. Therefore, the government, which Hobbes proposes to exit the state of war, would, for Locke, directly introduce or set the stage for civil war. In Locke’s Treatise, the social contract binds citizens to a government, which is responsible to its citizenry. If the government fails to represent the interest of its citizens, its citizens have the right and obligation to overthrow it. By contrast, in Hobbes’s Leviathan, there is no reciprocal relationship between the ruler and the ruled. Absolute arbitrary government invests all rights in the sovereign and the citizens forfeit their rights. It is because of these different views on the purpose and origin of government that one can say Locke’s “Second Treatise of Government” is a successful confutation of Hobbes’s
In this essay, the author
- Argues that the exercise of arbitrary power puts the absolute government in a state of war against its people.
- Explains that one who attempts to get another man into his absolute power, puts himself in a state of war with him. the injury and the crime are equal, whether committed by the wearer of crown, or some petty villain.
- Analyzes how locke describes the arbitrary power to take someone’s life whenever one pleases as tyrannical.
- Opines that men have the right to preserve what they have not a power to part with and to rid themselves of those who invade this fundamental, sacred, and unalterable law of self-preservation, for which they entered into society.
- Analyzes locke's argument that people in nature are free and therefore cannot voluntarily submit themselves to slavery. the government cannot have more power than the citizens have to give up.
- Argues that hobbes' claim that people can never be worse off under a system of government than they were in the state of nature is contrary to his.
- Explains that a government is established for the preservation of property and does not have the right to enslave, destroy or impoverish its subjects.
- Argues that locke's limited form of government can never bring peace, only a state of cease-fire since those who dare take up armes, to defend or introduce an opinion, are still in warrre.
- Analyzes locke's argument that a collective defense against the government is equivalent to civil war.
- Argues that locke's second treatise of government is a successful confutation of hobbes' leviathan.
1132 wordsRead More - Thomas Hobbes' Leviathananalytical essayHobbes purpose to his state of nature philosophy was to describe human nature. He argues that, in the absence of social condition, every action we perform, no matter how charitable or benevolent, is done for reasons which are ultimately self-serving (p.43-47). For example, if I were to donate to charity, I am actually taking delight in demonstrating my power. Hobbes believes that any account of human action, including morality, must be consistent with the fact that we are all self-serving. His theory notes that humans are essentially equal, both mentally and physically, so that even the weakest person has the strength to kill the strongest (p.44). Given our equal standing, Hobbes believes that there are three natural causes of quarrel ...
In this essay, the author
- Analyzes how hobbes perfected his moral and political theories in his controversial book leviathan in 1651. he advises that people should look into themselves to see the nature of humanity.
- Explains that hobbes' state of nature philosophy was to describe human nature. he believes that human action, including morality, must be consistent with the fact that we are all self-serving.
- Analyzes how pojman discusses the need for moral code in the book, the moral life, by looking at golding's lord of the flies.
- Analyzes how hobbes' answer to the lack of moral codes is to implement laws. pojman believes that morality consists of a set of rules that promote the flourishing of nearly everyone.
- Explains that while hobbes' and pojman's ideas are similar, they are not identical. different moral theories emphasize different purposes and in different ways.
979 wordsRead More - Comparing Hobbe's and Locke's Theories on Natureanalytical essayThomas Hobbes was an English philosopher, who lived between 1588 and 1679. He witnessed multiple events throughout his life that later led him to write his book “Leviathan,” in 1651 once the war had ended. Hobbes witnessed the English Civil War (1642-1651), the interregnum period of England starting in 1649, and the hardest of them all; tens of thousands people dying throughout the span of 9 years. In Leviathan, Hobbes firstly talks about the state of nature. He goes into how life would be without the state, simply why people needed a state to be able to find rational ground, and he tries to justify the existence of state by pointing disadvantages of its absence (CITE). He later goes into defining the sovereign of the sate, and tries to explain the sovereign’s power and limits. It is said that Leviathan means “Mortal God,” so by that being said, Hobbes gives too much importance and power to the state – the state is a Mortal God.
In this essay, the author
- Explains that they will be drawing information from hobbes' "leviathan" and locke's "two treatises of government" for their essay on the state of nature.
- Analyzes how hobbes witnessed the english civil war (1642-1651), the interregnum period of england starting in 1649, and tens of thousands dying throughout the span of 9 years.
- Explains that john locke saw the glorious revolution (1688-1689), which was the british people's attempt to change the sovereign in the direction that they wanted it to go.
- Analyzes how hobbes draws a pessimistic picture of the state of nature, stating that there are clear differences between people.
- Explains that nature has made men equal in body, and mind, but the difference between man and man is not so considerable, as one man can claim to himself any benefit, to which another may not pretend.
- Analyzes how hobbes is saying that the weak can come together and overthrow and defeat the strong people, leaving no authority to be established. different individuals are going to start desiring the same thing and they simply can't enjoy.
- Opines that in such a condition, there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain, and consequently no culture of the earth, navigation, nor use of commodities imported by sea, no commodities building.
- Analyzes how hobbes argues that nothing is unjust in the state of nature. he believes everyone has the right to do anything he/she wants.
- Analyzes how hobbes' state of nature is pessimistic and is not a place to survive.
- Explains that locke's idea of the state of nature is that everyone is equal to everyone. he does not think that this leads the people to war.
- Explains that even though the earth and all inferior creatures be common to all men, every one has a property in his own person.
- Analyzes locke's view on the state of nature. he believes that all people have natural rights from birth: life, liberty, and property.
- Analyzes how hobbes and locke think that human nature is selfish, and that no one truly feels secure and everyone seeks peace.
- Analyzes hobbes' view of the political system, where there is no common power over all states, and no world government for the people to follow.
- Compares hobbes' view on the state of nature with locke's.
1231 wordsRead More - Thomas Hobbes's Leviathananalytical essayHobbes argues that humans have a continuous and restless desire for power that can only end after death (58). His claim of human nature extends towards claiming that all humans are equal. Because everyone is equal, this gives each man ample opportunity to take anything that he desires from anyone else, or act in any way, in their desire to live a more comfortable life. Hobbes calls this the “natural condition”, where any man can do whatever he wants; everyone is free. However, due to the fact that everyone is free, it also remains that no one is free. If one man wishes to kill another, there is nothing stopping him from committing such an act, considering every man lives solely to fulfill his personal desires. In the natural condition, if humans have absolute freedom and the right to act as they please, it leads to very little and no freedom because they live in constant fear of one another. By living in these conditions, men will live a life that is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Hobbes 76). Furthermore, in the natural condition, no one is free to have or keep what they desire, because anyone can take it. There is no agreement on what’s good, what is just, or what is moral, and it’s difficult to agree on what is fair because humans live in such anarchy. He also claims that nothing can be unjust, because there is no means to understand what is moral or immoral (78). The natural condition includes no morality, as no one is being guided by good beyond what is good for them personally.
In this essay, the author
- Analyzes how hobbes describes the nature of man as functioning solely upon the pursuit of power and war.
- Analyzes how hobbes argues that humans have a continuous and restless desire for power that can only end after death.
- Explains that hobbes states that humans must learn the laws of nature in order to be free from the natural condition, preserve life, and ultimately achieve true freedom.
- Opines that hobbes' natural desires are an unceasing craving for power. he says that there must be a leader appointed to maintain peace throughout society and ensure the consistent preservation of the contract.
593 wordsRead More - The State Of Nature In Thomas Hobbes's Leviathananalytical essayWhy does Hobbes believe that the state of nature will be so bad? I.e. what is it about our make-up as human beings that would lead to this state of nature? Do you think that Hobbes is being too pessimistic or even reductionistic about human nature? What is he leaving out, if so? If not, what evidence do you have that Hobbes got the nature of human beings right?
In this essay, the author
- Describes the reasons why hobbes believes that the state of nature will be so bad.
- Analyzes how hobbes's leviathan argues that humans are inherently only self-interested and will do anything to benefit themselves.
- Analyzes hobbes' deductive argument that people are naturally attracted to events that make them feel good (appetites) and repel events (aversions). they seek pleasure for both the present and the future.
- Analyzes how hobbes described how humans were averse to being killed in the state of nature.
- Analyzes how hobbes is too reductionist and the axioms that he relies on are ignorant of weak.
- Explains that hobbes assumed that people were always rationally trying to benefit their self-interest, but this is not the case. people make decisions that logically benefit nobody and are clearly against their own self interest.
- Analyzes how hobbes would counter by demonstrating how each of these cases are ultimately dictated by self-interest.
- Argues that even irrational choices can be defined as self-interested. hobbes would argue that smoking may provide a short-term hedonistic pleasure greater than its long-lasting harm.
- Argues that hobbes' counters are too radical and far-fetched; nobody thinks about distant selfish benefits when making such decisions.
- Analyzes how hobbes can manipulate people's intentions to demonstrate that they are motivated by self-interest. his theory is an ideology that can't be disproven.
- Argues that hobbes's claim that people are only motivated by self-interest and that selfishness leads to others' harm in the state of nature is what weakens his argument.
1446 wordsRead More