Hobbes Vs Locke

Words: 561
Pages: 3

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are both very influential theoretical philosophers. They have both shared their ideologies in how the government should operate. Despite their shared commitments in philosophy, Hobbes and Locke have several points of divergence. Hobbes’s ideology is mostly based on a monarchy. In Hobbes’s eyes a monarchy solves conflicts, insures stability, and consistency in policies. While in the other hand Locke believed voluntary dictatorship/ democracy is the best way to govern a society. Locke’s idea was that a society could be best governed with the consent of people. That being said dictatorship was still an idea at hand. The most compelling theory of the social contract is Locke’s theory, even though I am in defiance with the idea of a dictatorship as an exceptional way …show more content…
People need a government, particularly a monarchy, to tell them what to do or else every person would be fighting each other. In short, the social contract theory declared that common security should be a common need. Therefore, a bit of everyone’s individual liberty should be sacrificed by everyone in order to achieve security. Moreover, with everyone agreeing to sacrifice a right for their well being, the social contract then grants everyone’s right to liberty to be mutually transferred. An example of this is if someone gave up their right to enter and go around their neighbor’s property while their neighbors also gave up that right. For mutual security, they share a common interest of their well being. Hobbes’s idea here is that in this case the agreement is to give up the natural right is not something clear-cut. This is because Hobbes believes we are all born into a society with laws and contracts in place. Therefore, having everyone’s natural right taken away is a good and healthy in order to maintain neutrality, security, stability, and