Hobbes and Locke
Political philosophy was reborn in the Renaissance and expanded upon in the Enlightenment. Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were two men that appeared at this time, and both changed the course of human and governmental thought. Hobbes supported the absolutism of the 17th and 18th centuries and Locke?s concept of the social contract inspired revolts like the French Revolution, the Glorious Revolution, and the American Revolution. Both men were brilliant and contributed to the age that changed people?s thought on the world. The views of Hobbes and Locke on subjects like government, man, and the human condition were opposite, but they both had a profound impact on the development of modern Europe. The most apparent difference between Hobbes and Locke is their view of man and society. Hobbes says man is born evil, but Locke says he is born flawed but good deep down. Hobbes followed the lead of Machiavelli in describing the state of nature for humans. Man by nature is evil. In the state of nature there is no formal law, no order, no culture, and no hope. Nature was a state of total chaos where no man has any individual rights, and all men are at war. Here, life is a constant battle for power, ending in death.
A government?s job is to maintain internal peace and protect the natural rights of its subjects. Everyone agrees on that, governmental theory defines how this government should do its job. Hobbes, once again Machiavellian, believed in one absolute ruler that made all of the decisions. Such a harsh force is required to get anything accomplished in such a warped world. People recognize the need of the dictator since without the strict unquestionable laws would limit a man?s rights to ensure the safety of others. All of the subjects would give up a little power, or liberty to do as each man pleases, and this is pooled and given to the ruler. He now can use this power to create a system of laws to suppress human nature. The ?natural laws? that were popular to include in theory during Hobbes? time were not upheld in nature, but a government can force a man to live by them. This is a sort of social contract where the people agree to give a little power to a ruler who will do with that power what is necessary to keep human nature suppressed. Locke speaks of a social contract as well, just in a more positive sense. His view of government is built around the same idea of the subjects giving up some rights in order to secure themselves. This social contract is not one to preserve life, as Hobbes believed it was, but to regulate property and a man?s right to own it. The right to own property should pose no problem at first, because there is more than enough popery for every man to enjoy. However, as the population increases, there will be more disputes over property, and its ownership, and some form of regulation must be adopted. It is for this reason that men join into a social contract. When men agree to a social contract similar to this, they are in essence lending their right to judge others and to govern themselves to one government.
Some common words found in the essay are:
Hobbes Machiavellian, Hobbes Locke, Glorious Revolutions, John Locke, social contract, American Revolution, Locke Political, Likewise Lockes, human nature, hobbes locke, join social contract, perfect freedom, preserve life, little power, life hobbes, ruler power, evil locke, join social,
Approximate Word count = 1249
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
