Individual liberty is the freedom to act and believe as one pleases. It is a widely controversial issue when it comes to the power of the government policing over individual�s freedoms. In this paper, I am going to compare two well known philosophers, Thomas Hobbes and John Rawls. In part one, I will explain the political and social positions taken by each philosopher. I will explain how Thomas Hobbes is associated with the �social contract theory,� and how John Rawls� theory of government is a �theory of justice.� In doing so, I will describe their different viewpoints on the government and its power over the people. In Part two, I will describe the differences between Hobbes and Rawls. I will argue that Rawls position on the government is the most reasonable, and I will explain why I believe so. In part three, I will explain my own theory and viewpoint with the example of sex laws, including prostitution. With this example, I will tell how and why I believe individual liberty is important. In part four, I will explain how someone might disagree with my position. I will explain how conservative individuals would argue that the government should regulate sexual activity to protect the greater good of society. Finally, I will conclude with discussing the power of the government and individual liberties in today�s society.
Part I
����������� Thomas Hobbes is an important political and social philosopher. He shares his political philosophy in his work Leviathan. Hobbes begins by describing the state of nature, which is how humans coped with one another prior to the existence of government. He explains that without government, �the weakest has the strength to kill the strongest� (Hobbes 507). People will do whatever it takes to further their own interests and protect their selves; thus, creating a constant war of �every man against every man� (Hobbes 508). His three reasons for people fighting amongst each other prior to government include �competition,� �diffidence,� and �glory� (Hobbes 508). He explains how men fight to take power over other people�s property, to protect them selves, and to achieve fame. He describes life in the state of nature as being �solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short� (Hobbes 508). Hobbes goes on to say that if men can go on to do as they please, there will always be war. To get out of this state of nature, individuals created contracts with each other and began to form a government.
Thomas 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.
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were seventeenth century political philosophers whose different beliefs stemmed from the different contexts in which each man lived.
...ip, and moved it against the quays. It heaved up the port side, and you could feel the decks-the compartments-being penetrated…You began to get afraid. I don’t know about other people, but I though “Geez I might get killed”.” (Remembering Pearl Harbor page 16). The attack by Japan was a smart tactical move on the United States. It was a two-fold plan, first If they attacked the US, they would draw attention from what was happening in Europe and all sources would be directed to the west half of the US. Second since the attack was so quick and unexpected the US was caught off guard. Since Japan attacked the largest base in the Pacific, Japan believed they would be able to cripple the US defenses for a while. “The Japanese did not realize that the attack on Dec. 7, 1941 would be a rallying cry for the Americans that had not enlisted to enlist in troops.” (Hampton)
Thomas Hobbes is now broadly viewed as one of a smaller group of truly extraordinary political thinkers, whose major work was the Leviathan rivals in meaning the political writings of Plato, Aristotle, Locke, Rousseau, Kant, and Rawls. Hobbes is most known for his for his early and elaborate development of what has come to be known as “social contract theory”, the method of justifying political principles or arrangements by appeal to the agreement that would be made among suitably situated rational, free, and equal persons. He is most famous for using his theory on the social contract to submit that human beings should submit to an absolute—undivided and unlimited—sovereign power (Lloyd, 2014) Hobbes wanted to ascertain the clear values for the construction of a civil organization that would not be subject to destruction from within. Hobbes maintains the ideology that people should look at their government as having absolute authority, while arguing that the government has absolute power he reserves the idea that we have the liberty of disobeying some of our government's instructions. He argues that subjects retain a
Hobbes views human nature as the war of each man against each man. For Hobbes, the essence of human nature can be found when we consider how man acts apart from any government or order. Hobbes describes the world as “a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man.” (Hobbes mp. 186) In such a world, there are “no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” (Hobbes mp. 186) Hobbes believes that laws are what regulate us from acting in the same way now. He evidences that our nature is this way by citing that we continue to lock our doors for fear of theft or harm. Hobbes gives a good argument which is in line with what we know of survivalism, and evidences his claim well. Hobbes claims that man is never happy in having company, unless that company is utterly dominated. He says, “men have no pleasure, (but on the contrary a great dea...
Firstly, according to Toland, many Japanese messages that were intercepted and decrypted were never sent to Pearl Harbor, showing that there was no way they could have been prepared for the attack. Vital messages were intercepted starting in the summer of 1941; one divided Pearl Harbor into five grids and even asked for locations of the warships and carriers. S...
Hobbes, as one of the early political philosophers, believes human has the nature to acquire “power after power” and has three fundamental interests which are safety, “conjugal affections”, and riches for commodious lives. (Hobbes, p108, p191) From this basis, Hobbes deducts that in a state of nature, human tends to fight against each other (state of war) to secure more resources (Hobbes,
In conclusion, Hobbes argues in the Leviathan that people are equal mentally and physically. Therefore, people naturally will fight for what they want and to protect what is theirs. Hobbes argues that morality doesn’t apply in a society where there are no laws or governance. People do whatever is needed to do for self-preservation and whatever must be done is not seen as unjust. Additionally, everyone wants a greater power and this is to have control and so that they will be seen as less of a weak opponent to attack or invade their lands. I agree with Thomas Hobbes who argued that if people were not subject to laws or governance; everyone would result to fighting each other.
The Pearl Harbor attack didn’t just occurred because the Japanese were bored and wanted to Bomb someone, the Japanese actually had a reason to attack the United States in such a horrendous way. Since the Japanese wanted to rule Asia, the Japanese first sent armies to conquer Manchuria, and then eventually conquering all of China (What We Knew Before Pearl Harbor) The U.S. wanted Japan to stop attacking China and trying to conquer it, in order for that to happen, President Roosevelt decided to prevent Japan from buying oil, this would make the Japanese Navy and Army useless (Why Did Japan Attack?) The Japanese eventually got mad at the United States and decided to prepare an attack on the U.S. The Japanese started to prepare for the attack on November 26, 1941; they got ready to go make a 3,000-mile journey across the Pacific...
The bombing of Pearl Harbor shocked America and frightened the country. The U.S. needed to come up with a plan but it was very difficult without an Air Force base in Asia close enough to attack Japan. Finally Captain Francis Low Assistant Chief of staff thought of the idea of launching B-25 bombers off of an aircraft carrier. The B-25 bombers were light enough to take off within a short distance of an aircraft carrier but also travel with a reasonable bomb load and fly the 2,000 miles the mission would require. The idea finally reached to General Arnold, Head of The U.S. Army Air Force and appointed Lieutenant Colonel Jimmy Doolittle as the project officer.
On December 7, 1941 the Japanese launched a surprise attack on the United States Naval Base Pearl Harbor in Hawaii. A series of important events led up to the bombing for Pearl Harbor. Tensions between the United States and Japan had been building for a time. The Philippine islands, at that time an American territory, were a Japanese target. Believing an invasion of the Philippines would invoke American hostilities, the Japanese decided that rather than seize and fortify the islands and wait for the American counterattack, the Japanese military would attack Pearl Harbor. This, they believed, would remove the American forces needed for the reconquest of the islands and thus prevent the U.S. Pacific Fleet from interfering with future military
Although Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau have differing ideals concerning the commonwealth or government they have all still contributed greatly to our modern society. As a result of being in the state of nature, where man is focused on self-preservation. This self-preservation leads to a state of war because we are only looking out for ourselves. The consensus of Locke and Hobbes is that in the state of war man cannot be trusted to act rationally concerning
The three key traits that are discussed are competition, the “equality of ability (which) produces equality of hope for the attaining of our goals” (“Leviathan I” 3); distrust, the mentality of wanting to “increase . . . a man’s power over others . . . as it is necessary to his survival” (“Leviathan I” 4); and glory, that “every man wants his associates to value him as highly as he values himself” (“Leviathan I” 4). Hobbes very importantly establishes that men are created equal, and these traits inevitably exist in their natural states of nature (“Leviathan I” 3). These unavoidable qualities are “principal causes of discord” (“Leviathan I” 3) because they force men to invade for the respective reasons of gain, safety, and reputation on that basis of survival (“Leviathan I” 4). Therefore, Hobbes leads into the bigger argument for a larger entity or state to have sovereignty, because “for as long as men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in the condition known as ‘war’” (“Leviathan I”
Now to more easily understand his perspective, one has to keep in mind that Leviathan was written during the English Civil War and so, much of the book was influenced by it. Leviathan is occupied with demonstrating the necessity of a strong central authority to avoid the natural human evil that caused wars like the one he witnessed. Hobbes believed that all people are intrinsically motivated to provide themselves with as many resources as possible. Because resources in the world are limited, people thus become greedy in their competition for these resources.
Hobbes believed that human beings naturally desire the power to live well and that they will never be satisfied with the power they have without acquiring more power. After this, he believes, there usually succeeds a new desire such as fame and glory, ease and sensual pleasure or admiration from others. He also believed that all people are created equally. That everyone is equally capable of killing each other because although one man may be stronger than another, the weaker may be compensated for by his intellect or some other individual aspect. Hobbes believed that the nature of humanity leads people to seek power. He said that when two or more people want the same thing, they become enemies and attempt to destroy each other. He called this time when men oppose each other war. He said that there were three basic causes for war, competition, distrust and glory. In each of these cases, men use violence to invade their enemies territory either for their personal gain, their safety or for glory. He said that without a common power to unite the people, they would be in a war of every man against every man as long as the will to fight is known. He believed that this state of war was the natural state of human beings and that harmony among human beings is artificial because it is based on an agreement. If a group of people had something in common such as a common interest or a common goal, they would not be at war and united they would be more powerful against those who would seek to destroy them. One thing he noted that was consistent in all men was their interest in self-preservation.