Preview

Hobbes And Rousseau Analysis

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1774 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Hobbes And Rousseau Analysis
In this paper, I will analyze both Hobbes’ and Rousseau’s view on the Nature of Man. Through my analysis of both, I will show contrast and comparison between both philosophical views. I will identify and explain the central aspect of the Nature of Man as identified by Hobbes and Rousseau and will make connections through a series of explanations and examples that were presented by Hobbes and Rousseau.

Hobbes talks about his view of Human Nature in his book The Leviathan. His central belief was built around the idea that the nature of humanity leads people to seek power. He believed that humans naturally desired the power to live well, and that human beings will never be satisfied with the power they currently possess unless they acquire more power. Hobbes defined power as” the ability to
…show more content…
According to Rousseau, there are some good things in civilization but there are negatives that come with it. This correlates to his famed quote “A man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains”. This can be interpreted as people are born free, but they are chained by the societies that they live in. People believe they live above society’s standards but it is society themselves who reminds people that you always seek approval from them and always conform to their beliefs, therefore it makes us a slave to societies standards. Even the people who enforce society’s standards and think they are the perfect example for society also show that they are a bigger slave than to those who are trying to seek the approval of society. Rousseau's main argument is that the main cause for all of human nature's problem is not 'sin' but separation from 'Nature.' He believed that Nature has always been kind to man and only when he separates himself from Nature that he degenerates both physically and morally. This is in direct contrast to Hobbes' views that man is fundamentally

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Unlike Thomas Hobbes, who believed humans were naturally evil, Jean Rousseau believed that humans are born, neither good nor bad, thus corruption or goodness is taught from the society. For example, when children are born, everything they…

    • 514 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Anth 100 Essay 1

    • 2092 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Our society’s progression originates from the ideologies, principles, and dogmas passed down through a succession of different philosophical thinkers. We will focus our attention upon the post-Columbian European and American thinkers who have implemented their beliefs to assess the origins of human nature. This essay will provide a greater understanding between Michel de Montaigne, Rousseau Jean-Jacques and Thomas Hobbes with their descriptions of human nature, society’s origin, and the forces that propelled change in human history.…

    • 2092 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    Hobbes essentially believes that one must discover how the natural person functions to determine what type of government should be put in place and how man can accomplish its formation. He therefore begins Leviathan by arguing that every aspect of humanity can be explained through materialistic principles, because man consists simply of matter in motion. Hobbes believes individuals are born as blank slates and the knowledge man achieves of the world is derived from external bodies pressing against him. This constant motion occurring internally in each man eventually transfers to the surface of their body creating senses, which in turn relays messages to the brain and forms opinions and imagination. Hobbes believes we are driven by our passions and desires, which means man is essentially a bundle of all his passions in constant motion. An important aspect of this is that once a thing is in motion it will eternally be in motion until an outside force acts upon it. The fact that these bundles of passion are in constant motion until an…

    • 1304 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rousseau believed that in order for a society to be justified,…

    • 1358 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Hobbes Vs Locke

    • 5047 Words
    • 21 Pages

    He begins noting that humans are essentially equal, both mentally and physically, in so far as even the weakest person has the strength to kill the strongest. Given our equal standing, Hobbes continues by noting how situations in nature make us naturally prone to quarrel. There are three natural causes of disagreement among people: competition for limited supplies of material possessions, distrust of one another, and glory in so far as people remain hostile to preserve their powerful reputation. Given the natural causes of conflict, Hobbes concludes that the natural condition of humans is a state of perpetual war of all against all, where no morality exists, and everyone lives in constant fear (Hobbes Pt 1, Ch…

    • 5047 Words
    • 21 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    hobbes and kant

    • 1500 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Hobbes was a different kind of philosopher that had a very pessimistic view on humanity. In Hobbes’ book the Leviathan, he believed that humans were naturally nasty creatures and needed to be regulated in a society. For Hobbes one thing he also believed in was Utilitarianism, which is the desire for pleasure that drives our actions, basically, the most useful choice for your benefit. Hobbes had a theory that was called “the state of nature”, which in the eyes of Hobbes was life for humans before any kind of laws or governments. He says that the state of nature is a violent place with no lows. In the state of nature there is no business, no account of time, buildings, and there is always danger around the corner. For Hobbes the “state of nature” was a savage place that could only be fixed by laws, there is only peace when there is no war and no war is a place with laws. Hobbes came to the conclusion that humans cant live in groups without law. Hobbes was…

    • 1500 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Hobbes vs. Rousseau

    • 2320 Words
    • 10 Pages

    For one to be a good citizen, there are certain expectations a person must follow to achieve this goal. While many people have their own ideas of what makes a good citizen, there is little consensus to exactly what this would be. Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in their books The Leviathan and The Social Contract, create a system of political governing where the citizen plays a certain role and has certain expectations to carry out this role for the governmental system to work properly. In this paper, I will discuss what each of the men believed to be the role of the average citizen to support the state. Both men have quite different opinions in regards to the roles of citizens. While both are good theories, and create a strong case for government, neither is applicable in the real world because what is demanded of the citizen in these systems of government is based on certain assumptions. The assumptions made by these men, both good and bad, are not evident in the every day person. Thomas Hobbes believes, that all men are egocentric, by nature. This is to say that men spend their whole lives looking for what makes the happiest as an individual. Even when men socialize, it is not for the benefit of building strong ties between each other, but simply for personal benefit. Hobbes argues that man is self- centered in nature because he desires power. This arises from the fact that man, unlike animals, may seek things that are not tangible. Hobbes argues, not only are men egocentric, but also equal. Hobbes believes that even though every person may have different levels of strength, intelligence or character that all men are equal. "For such is the nature of men that, howsoever they may acknowledge many others to be more witty or more eloquent or more learned, yet they will hardly believe there be so many so wise as themselves, for they see their won wit at hand and other men 's at a distance." (Leviathan, 98) More importantly in dealing with equality, Hobbes…

    • 2320 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    This man “speak[s] continually of need, avarice, oppression, desires, and pride” ideas Rousseau argues “they acquire in society” (Rousseau 17). Because that man is not a savage, “Hobbes failed to notice… [man’s] innate repugnance to seeing his fellow man suffer,” a concept Rousseau refers to as pity (Rousseau 36). It is this natural pity that keeps people from hurting others for no reason. And since Hobbes does not see natural pity he does not understand that “as long as he does not resist the inner impulse of compassion, he will never harm another man … except … if his preservation were involved, he is obliged to give preference to himself” (Rousseau 14).…

    • 2343 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In the 18th century, philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) disputed the conception of the ‘state of nature' put forward by Hobbes in the 17th century. This essay aims to establish, and following that, examine, the differences between the views of both Hobbes and Rousseau on this political philosophical stance.…

    • 1650 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes Vs Socrates Essay

    • 410 Words
    • 2 Pages

    In Hobbes Leviathan, one might recognize the complete controversy between he, and Socrates. Socrates, was a man with little answers; he made you question things you did not know, and things you thought you knew. However, Hobbes, gives you immense immediate answers, and even claims that philosophers are wrong (page 57). Hobbes also claims that men has “restless desire of power after power” (page 58); he claims this explains how and why people act in a certain manner. Reflecting on our modern society, we see a continuous aim of people working to become more powerful among their peers. This is why we have promotions in jobs, positions in the work force, and even grades on report cards. Hobbes claims that power explains most actions throughout history, and without power, people…

    • 410 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Hobbes and Machiavelli

    • 2002 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes, the son of an English vicar in the late 16th Century, approaches the questions of politics and human nature in a unique way, but there are definite similarities between his work and the work of earlier philosophers. Hobbes’ political theory coincides with the political theory of Niccolò Machiavelli, and yet differs in the theory of virtù. Hobbes follows Machiavelli in some important aspects of political theory, and yet expands upon or discards Machiavelli’s ideas in other important aspects. Both men agree that politics directly corresponds to the nature of man and that the concepts of right and wrong are arbitrary and result only from human perspectives and experience. Hobbes focuses on the principle that what is good and what is evil comes from a person’s own interests while Machiavelli emphasizes the point of self-reliance, or virtù. The idea of virtù is opposed to Hobbes’ argument of the human mind in nature. Hobbes states that rulers rise from the need to have a ruler and Machiavelli asserts that rulers arise only because of either fortune or their virtù, meaning qualities they have in their personalities.…

    • 2002 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes begins his explanation of the state of nature in chapter 13 of “Leviathan” by stating that all men are equal in nature. Although one man may be stronger or more intelligent than another, humans are relatively equal in every way because of their ability to manipulate and form alliances: “For as to the strength of body, the weakest has strength enough to kill the strongest, either by secret machination, or by confederacy with others, that are in the same danger as himself.”1 Because men are all equal, Hobbes believed that they desire the same things. If two men share the same desire, they become enemies.…

    • 1193 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    In The Leviathan, Hobbes begins by explaining man’s state of nature. Hobbes explains the state of nature or man before government, institution or laws as a constant state of war. He elaborates by saying that people’s individual rationality, as well as the fact that all people are roughly equal in power, dictates the violent, ‘preemptive aggressive, nature of man (Hobbes). Hobbes also explains the motivations that drive man to be in a state of conflict; man is inclined to be violent because of scarce resources, diffidence and religious disagreements. Finally, Hobbes sums up the life of man in the state or nature as one that is solitary, nasty, poor, short and brutish:…

    • 1361 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Racques Rosseau were philosophers who stated their belief of human nature and how we should govern mankind. Although Rousseau was born a different time than Hobbes and Locke, they all had a very strong influence on the way governments should function. They created a revolutionary idea of the state of nature, the way men were before a government came into play. Each philosopher developed guidelines and responsibilities that the government is obliged to. Although proposing different views and ideas, they all contributed significant ideas to society.…

    • 805 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Nature of Man

    • 1216 Words
    • 5 Pages

    What is the strongest motivation for humans? Is it man’s greedy sense of self-preservation and survival that motivates him? Hobbes would think so. Is it the idea that man is more important than other living creatures on this earth? Is it the acquisition of supreme power that proves his ideas to be right? Does might make right? I think the real question here is what the true nature of man is, what is man’s strongest motivation? Is man naturally motivated by evil or good? Whether or not one can actually answer these questions is debatable, but one thing is for certain, there is an original state of nature that man can be summed up by. What people think this is can be determined as subjective truth unless the answer is self-evident in which case the answer is unquestionable. Rousseau believed that man’s strongest motivation is compassion. Compassion is what makes humans continue to exist because compassion allows us to see the damage we as people can cause and understand the motives of others. Rousseau also believed that man, in his first state of nature, is neither good nor evil, he is neutral. At this state, man’s main concern is survival, but this is not an evil thing. The term that developed out of this notion was “noble savage”. Rousseau also believed that in this state of nature man is most truly free. As soon as man enters the institution of society or even a family, he is now subjected to the ideas of authority and submission. Man at this point battles constantly with the concerns of slave and master relationships. Rousseau believed that compassion was man’s strongest motivation because all humans come to understand how terrible pain and suffering is and generally sympathize for others when they undergo them.…

    • 1216 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays