Preview

The Main Arguments Between Thomas Hobbes And Jean Rousseau

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
411 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Main Arguments Between Thomas Hobbes And Jean Rousseau
The main arguments between Thomas Hobbes natural state of man and Jean Rousseau’s natural state of man, where there is no society or government over us, is whether man in naturally selfish and out for his/her own personal gain and protection or if we would naturally come together for the betterment of all persons and cooperation. I will first be talking about Hobbes’ view point of the state of nature of man and then Rousseau’s objection to Hobbes and his differing thoughts about the state of nature of man.
Thomas Hobbes Leviathan is written as an argument for advocating for an absolute monarchy or totalitarian government in which one third party person or Leviathan has complete control over all those who live in his realm. The authority figure would make all decisions regarding ‘just’ and ‘injustice’ ordeals and ultimately between life and death and the citizens just must obey the law full headily. …show more content…
He states “…and therefore if two men desire the same thing, which nevertheless they cannot both have, they become enemies…” (Leviathan ch.XIII par3). Therefore the “natural state of man” in Hobbes’ point of view is one of purely self-interested and anything or more specifically anyone that threatens our own wellbeing and development and gains is an enemy. In this state of nature, we act only for the betterment of ourselves and not for society which is why we must be governed by an absolute leader so we do not exist in this savage state of pure
Continue Reading
View Writing Issues

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    John Locke's The Second Treatise Of Government
    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages

    John Locke's The Second Treatise Of Government

    At first sight, Locke’s The Second Treatise of Government, seemed quite similar to Hobbes’s Leviathan. They both believed that a state of nature is a state that exist without government. They believe that men are created equal in this state, however Hobbes argues that because of self-preservation, man possessed the desire to control over other man. Locke, on the other hand, reasons with a more peaceful and pleasant place.…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Is The State Of Nature A Hobsian State Of War Of All Against All

    • 3361 Words
    • 9 Pages

    Is The State Of Nature A Hobsian State Of War Of All Against All

    The argument presented by Thomas Hobbes in chapter 13 of Leviathan, is that the state of nature is a state of war of all against all. Such a view had previously been discussed- earlier versions of the argument appear in other significant works- however it is Hobbes account of a state in “continuall feare of danger and violent death”1 upon which I will focus on and critique in this essay. There are many reasons why many seem to regard Hobbes argument as the most accurate portrayal of a pre-civilised society, many believe it to be so straightforward and seemingly correct that to object it would be to ignore a necessary truth. Secondly, those who accept Hobbes’ view of a human nature that is so egotistical and unforgiving, would seemingly too agree to the assumption of a gloomy, unbearable state of nature. In this essay I shall argue that such opinions are not logically justified as Hobbes’s argument holds its foundations solidly in assumption alone, an assumption that was heavily moulded on his surroundings of a savage Civil War. Hobbes’s argument lies solely on the grounds that human beings are intrinsically wicked and self-centred beings an argument that cannot be completely validated and therefore cannot be a ‘necessary truth’. Yet despite holding such a bleak outlook on the human condition and its simple invalidity the work of Thomas Hobbes still shapes the political word today2 and it continues to impact our understanding of human nature and interactions. In order to justify my critique of Hobbes I will begin by presenting both his original argument and a brief view of some modern interpretations before cross examining their conclusions against that of other social contract theorist such as Locke and Rousseau as well as rational logic to present the argument that the state of nature is most certainly not a state of war of all against all.…

    • 3361 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Compare And Contrast Locke And Hobbes
    • 397 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Compare And Contrast Locke And Hobbes

    After analyzing how Locke and Hobbes understand the state of nature it is evident that they share many ideas but they also show essential differences in their ideas. Hobbes regards the state of nature as a state of war, in which natural law is established only after a process of reasoning. This process leads men to the conclusion that they must somehow find…

    • 397 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Rousseau Vs Hobbes
    • 209 Words
    • 1 Page

    Rousseau Vs Hobbes

    In favor of Hobbes, he does make several valid points. His theory in regards to constant competition applies to this day, as people constantly find themselves in situations where they meet others that are of equal physical strengths and could be faced with a conflict as a result. Despite the points that Hobbes makes, his theory is overall negative, as living in a constant state of fear and paranoia is absolutely no way to live one’s life. Rousseau is very pertinent to remind others of how life was before society and technology took over. Life was extremely simple, and everyone was fairly alright with living alone and focusing on themselves and their life. If today’s society was the same as it was over a thousand years ago, almost no one would…

    • 209 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes' Remedy for
    • 680 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes' Remedy for

    The final sentence of that passage, "And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short," seems to sum up what Hobbes has been leading up to in the first twelve chapters of Leviathan: that without a sovereign power, without Leviathan, the natural life of man is simply horrible. It is a life in which people naturally and constantly seek to destroy one another.…

    • 680 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Similarities Between John Locke And Thomas Hobbes
    • 478 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Similarities Between John Locke And Thomas Hobbes

    Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan expressed his views of how the government should run the people they governed. Leviathan stated that the people should hand over their rights to one strong ruler. He believed that all humans were all naturally selfish and wicked and by having a ruler to have complete control over them, they will gain order and obedience. Thomas believed that without a strong ruler, people will constantly have war with one another and life would be “poor and short.” Hobbes called this agreement by which people created this type of government the “social contract”. In short, Hobbes believed that the best type of government was an absolute monarchy, which will impose order and demand obedience; a “sea monster” type of ruler to control the wicked people.…

    • 478 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes vs. John Locke
    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes vs. John Locke

    Hobbes was a philosopher who saw humans as a purely physical being. He believed that all human actions can be explained through the motions in our bodies. According to Hobbes all feelings and emotions are a result of phantasms, our perception of the objects around us. This perception is a motion within our bodies and each person perceives these phantasms differently causing love, hate, desires, and what we think is good and bad. Every feeling that comes from ones perspective has a physical feeling, such as desires can cause certain pains and it is only human nature that one does whatever is needed in order to relieve those pains. Hobbes therefore sees humans as being able, by their state of nature, to take or do whatever necessary for themselves even if it shows no regard for the other people their actions may harm. This inevitably would end up in a fight for survival or “the war of all against all”. In order to prevent such a war from happening Hobbes thought it necessary that the individuals must promise each other to give up their right to govern themselves to the sovereign for the mutual benefit of the people. This sovereign then has absolute power to rule with no questions asked and not to only act on behalf of the citizens but to completely embody their will. In summation, Hobbes believed that society could only exist under power of the sovereign and that life in the state of nature is violent, short and brutish, as all men act on self-interest.…

    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Hobbes State Of Nature Essay
    • 1395 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Hobbes State Of Nature Essay

    That men are sinister in the State of Nature could be promoted as a headline to Hobbes’s magnum opus, Leviathan. In the state of nature, men are not magnanimous beings. A notion similar to the first sin, yet different from a philosopher like Jean Jacque Rousseau. It has always been taken for granted that there are wicked and virtuous humans, yet for Hobbes, humans are innately wicked. These notions, however abstract and contradictory they may seem, are demonstrated in this short paper; Hobbes’s chapter 13 of Leviathan is abridged in this paper. First, the inclinations that drive men to behave in a wicked way are outlined step by step. Then Hobbes’s reason for having a common power is established. Generally, this paper is a reflection on Chapter 13 of Leviathan with explanation and commentary.…

    • 1395 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Analysis Of Thomas Hobbes Leviathan
    • 329 Words
    • 2 Pages

    Analysis Of Thomas Hobbes Leviathan

    “We should give our obedience to an unaccountable sovereign […] otherwise what awaits us is a “state of nature” that closely resembles civil war- a situation of universal insecurity” (iep.utm.edu). These words express Thomas Hobbes’ version of philosophical absolutism. He believes that a world without a government yields disorder and lunacy. Hobbes, in his book The Leviathan (1651), communicates a crucial need: a ruler who can keep the world in order, a feared, all-powerful ruler. He concludes in his book that the world needs a leviathan, a sea monster that lived during the time of Job in the Old Testament. This creature’s characteristics are described in chapter 41,…

    • 329 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes vs Locke
    • 551 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Hobbes vs Locke

    Thomas Hobbes believed mankind good and evil depended on what the individual loved and hated. He believed that life in the state of nature is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." (119) Mankind was naturally equal in power of mind and body so no individual was capable of dominating another. In a strictly natural condition there was no justice or injustice because everyone had their right to seek and take whatever is good and dispose of whatever was bad for them. He was for absolute monarchy. Thomas Hobbes believed that “authoritarian governments were necessary to keep human beings’ worst impulses under control.”(119) He did not believe that a large group of men would agree with one and other and peacefully run a country. Hobbes opposed constitutionalism because of his pessimistic view of human nature. The passages in Hobbes writings show that he did not desire the possibility of anything like modern totalitarianism. For Hobbes, any division of power was an invitation to chaos.…

    • 551 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    The Ideas of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke
    • 299 Words
    • 2 Pages

    The Ideas of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke

    Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were both seventeenth century English thinkers and writers. Each had their own views the government’s role and human nature which were vastly different from one another. They expressed their ideas in their works, Hobbes’s Leviathan and Locke’s Two Treatises of Government.…

    • 299 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    The English Civil War: Tone Of The British Government
    • 1671 Words
    • 7 Pages

    The English Civil War: Tone Of The British Government

    Thomas Hobbes was known for his most famous piece of work, The Leviathan. The cover of the book itself is an image of a significant figure overtop of a village as he’s wearing armor made of people. I believe this was to represent his belief in a superior leader and his people having his back no matter what. Just how Charles I expected. He needed his peoples support through taxes and warfare. Thomas Hobbes believed that it is always better to have security rather than liberty in a country. He was therefore deeply against the English Civil War. Throughout his life, Hobbes believed that the only true and correct form of government was the absolute monarchy. He also believed that every single human at heart was selfish and did everything for their own good. According to Hobbes, if government didn’t exist, humans would always be fighting with one another. In this state, Hobbes said, the life of a man was 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and…

    • 1671 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Powerful Essays

    Hobbes' Leviathan and Locke's Second Treatise of Government
    • 3013 Words
    • 87 Pages

    Hobbes' Leviathan and Locke's Second Treatise of Government

    Hobbes' Leviathan and Locke's Second Treatise of Government comprise critical works in the lexicon of political science theory. Both works expound on the origins and purpose of civil society and government. Hobbes' and Locke's writings center on the definition of the "state of nature" and the best means by which a society develops a systemic format from this beginning. The authors hold opposing views as to how man fits into the state of nature and the means by which a government should be formed and what type of government constitutes the best. This difference arises from different conceptions about human nature and "the state of nature", a condition in which the human race finds itself prior to uniting into civil society. Hobbes' Leviathan goes on to propose a system of power that rests with an absolute or omnipotent sovereign, while Locke, in his Treatise, provides for a government responsible to its citizenry with limitations on the ruler's powers. The understanding of the state of nature is essential to both theorists' discussions. For Hobbes, the state of nature is equivalent to a state of war. Locke's description of the state of nature is more complex: initially the state of nature is one of "peace, goodwill, mutual assistance and preservation". Transgressions against the law of nature, or reason which "teaches mankind that all being equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty and possessions," are but few. The state of nature, according to Locke's Treatise, consists of the society of man, distinct from political society, live together without any superior authority to restrict and judge their actions. It is when man begins to acquire property that the state of nature becomes somewhat less peaceful. At an undetermined point in the history of man, a people, while still in the state of nature, allowed one person to become their leader and judge over controversies. This was first the patriarch of a…

    • 3013 Words
    • 87 Pages
    Powerful Essays
    Read More
  • Better Essays

    Hobbes vs. Rousseau
    • 1427 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Hobbes vs. Rousseau

    Drug abuse is obviously a huge issue in our country, but how would Hobbes and Rousseau’s opinions differ on it? Hobbes talks about individual self interests and punishment. Rousseau talks about education and socialization. The both believe however that the sovereign should decide these laws…

    • 1427 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
    Read More
  • Good Essays

    Comparing Locke And Rousseau's State Of Nature
    • 539 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Comparing Locke And Rousseau's State Of Nature

    When comparing Rousseau to Hobbes and Locke, the differences in their ideologies are prominent, however, they are still similar in some ways. In the State of Nature according to Rousseau, “man’s natural sentiment was that of his existence, his first care that of his preservation” (Discourse, Part II). This man is known as the “nascent man” and is often contrasted with the “savage man”, who exists in civilized society. In this State of Nature, man’s primary concern is to look after himself, similar to Hobbes’ and Locke’s, However, this is essentially the extent of the similarities between the three. Hobbes and Locke believe that man is naturally a societal animal who thrives with the presence of politics, whereas Rousseau believes exactly the opposite: that man is naturally a solitary animal, and that society corrupts us.…

    • 539 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
    Read More