Comparing John Locke And Hobbes Authoritarian Governance

This philosophical study will define the contrasting forms of government that are the result of John Locke’s belief in the innate good of humankind in contrast to the innate evil of Thomas Hobbes’ authoritarian governance. Locke and Hobbes initially agree on a pre-history of human life in the “state of nature” by acknowledging the less organized rules and laws of human civilization under God. In agreement, these philosophers understand the “invention” of governments by human beings through the authority of God, but they contrast each other on the methods of governing. Locke’s major difference with Hobbes is based on the innate good of human beings that cooperated with each other in a state of nature, which defines he believed in a checks and
In this manner, there is a pre-state perception of human beings that is asserted before a governmental regime is formed in human societies. In Locke’s vision of the “state of nature” in the Second Treatise of Government, the premise of innate good defines the underlying assumption that human beings are naturally cooperative and responsible in their daily interactions. This form of “goodness’ is derived from the idea that the “state of nature” implies that although men may not always cooperate with each other (and go to war), but that they are more inclined to a popular form of governing through representation as a “social
In a similar way, Hobbes also agrees on the premise of the somewhat unstable relations between human beings before the invention of government: “And which is worst of all, continuall feare, and danger of violent death; and life of man, solitary, poore, brutish, and short (Hobbes, 2014, p.77). In this way, the pre-state relations between human beings is more chaotic and war-like, yet it reflects the similar necessity of inventing governments or a "social contract” that Locke supports as part of this development in the evolution of politics in human life. In these ways, Locke and Hobbes find agreement on the “state of nature”, but they have very different ways in which they form governments in the formation of “civilization” over time. These contrasting points of view present the religious values tht form the foundation of human society. This is part of the Christian interpretation that Locke and Hobbes bring to the dilemma of the “state of nature” and the legal premise of governance that binds human beings together in the