Lockes Versus Hobbes Essay

Submitted By BobbyRay2108
Words: 658
Pages: 3

Lockes and Hobbes were both social contract theorists, and both natural law theorists, but their resemblance ends with that. Hobbes state of nature is more logical because his claim describes humans simply partaking in what their primary and initial, more importantly natural, instinct. Howver, not everyone’s initial instinct is to choose self-preservation over others which is shown through the following points: humans are selfish, security is something everyone needs, for humans self preservation is the ultimate motivation for survival.
No matter what humans are selfish; they will even betray if necessary. A prime, modern day example of this are TV shows. For example the hit CBS show Survivor shows a group of people who are surviving on an island. While it appears that they will be working together, they ultimately will choose themselves over the other contestants. This same basic principle is seen in the wild too. Someone may argue that two animals of the same species may work together in order to survive, this however, is false. One of the animals would choose itself over the other one, as pure survival instinct. It may even come to the point of sacrificing the other animal for one of them to live and continue on. This goes along with Hobbes opinion concerning human nature, which states, “Man is not by nature a social animal, society could not exist except by the power of the state.” In other words humans need guidance just like when you were a young kid, you didn’t know the difference between right and wrong. This was a learned skill that most people absorbed through them carrying out an action and experiencing a consequence.
Security in a societal setting is something that everyone needs. Hobbes states, “You conceded your rights to the government, in return for your life.” This shows how whatever the state does is just by definition and you are under the government. All of society is a direct creation of the state, and a reflection of the will of the ruler, whether you agree with it or not. This brings up an important political issue concerning security, rebellion. Hobbes simply states, “No right to rebel.” there can happen no breach of covenant on the part of the sovereign; and consequently none of his subjects, by any pretence of forfeiture, can be freed from his subjection.” The ruler’s will defines good and evil for his subjects. The King can do no wrong, because lawful and unlawful, good and evil, are merely commands, merely the will of the…