A discussion on the opinions of Hobbes and Locke regarding natural law, mankind's natural characteristics, and the purpose and structure of government.
4 Answers | Add Yours
Nowadays, at least, most people would surely side with Locke. We see people as naturally fairly decent. We do not think that we need a "leviathan" government that has absolute power over us. I would definitely take Locke's part in this because I do not have as dark a view of human nature as Hobbes does.
I disagree with #2's assessment of most modern people siding with Locke. While Locke's ideas sound nice to most people, their indoctrination that big government is good and needed to take care of us would be, more likely, prevalent today. Our increasing dependence on government makes their control over us more absolute. Hobbes' world is more a reality around the world than Locke's, unfortunately. The fear that 'bad guys' would take over the place if there weren't an overlord protector is ludicrous, but it is a meme that most can't get beyond when thinking of a world without government.
Hm. I don't recall. One thing I did find interesting though is Locke's argument for private property. If I mix my labour with something, that something should become mine. I'd say that would radically change much of the world today where workers who work for practically nothing do the majority of work in some factory or plantation.
Thomas hobbes encouraged monarchies, and labeled people as evil, whilst John locke's ideas totally contradicted to the beliefs of hobbes.
Join to answer this question
Join a community of thousands of dedicated teachers and students.Join eNotes