Hobbes and Locke
Join now to read essay Hobbes and Locke
For the political theorists Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau there came a point in history where people, in order to have security in their persons and maintain a standard quality of life, entered into a social contract with one another and established the first sovereign states. For both theorists the period before the institution of a social contract, what they call the “state of nature”, is important in understanding what form this first government took and what rights or liberties it was meant to protect. The state of nature is a time in which primitive humans roamed the earth without regard for what we now consider laws or social customs. While not a scientific study of social or biological evolution by any means, in fact both Hobbes and Rousseau admit the State of Nature may very well have never existed, it is an important concept of abstract political theory that enables us to debate the role human nature plays in the formation of governments and how these governments can better serve the people who institute them.
Hobbes describes our natural state, in his treatise Leviathan, as one of equality. By this he does not mean moral or social equality, he is referring only to physical equality. He says, “Nature hath made men so equall, in the faculties of body, and mind.”(Hobbes 68) He adds that on occasion one may be stronger or smarter than another, however, “when all is reckoned together, the difference between man, and man, is not so considerable as that one man can thereupon claim to himselfe any benefit, to which another may not pretend, as well as he.”(Hobbes 68) What he means by this is that no one is safe from anyone else in the state of nature. Even if one is weaker than another, the weak can form alliance with others under the same threat and therefore have the power to kill the stronger. To Hobbes this equality of ability creates an equality of hope in people to fulfill their desires. He continues, “And therefore if any two men desire the same thing, which neverthelesse they cannot both enjoy, they become enemies.” (Hobbes 69) If one possesses that which another desires, it should be expected, in Hobbes state of nature, that the latter would attack the former for personal gain, and if successful the possession is only kept till another attacker comes along who desires it in kind.
This cycle, for Hobbes, leads to great diffidence or distrust, for when people live in this natural state they, “live without a common Power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called Warre; and such a warre, as is of every man, against every man.” (Hobbes 70) In the state of nature we are in constant war with one another for three main reasons: Competition, diffidence, and glory. Hobbes explains, “The first, maketh men invade for Gain; the second, for Safety; and the third, for Reputation.”(Hobbes 70) Because of this constant state of war, the state of nature is devoid of such things as culture, arts, science, industry, or society. Another result of this war of every man against every man is we have no concept of what is right or wrong, just or unjust. For Hobbes these are “qualities that relate man to society” and the only virtues we know in this state of war are “force and fraud.” (Hobbes 71) There is also no property or any concept of “mine and thine.” All we have is what we can get for as long as we can keep it. Indeed, for Hobbes, the state of nature is a very dark and dangerous place where we all live in constant fear and danger of violent death. In his words our lives in the state of nature are “solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.” (Hobbes 70)
Rousseau, writing a century later and often reacting directly to Hobbes rather negative view of the state of nature, has a very different concept of our natural state. Rousseau feels that the philosophers before him who have contemplated the idea of a state of nature that existed before the institution of laws and government never quite reached it. He says, “All of them, in short, constantly speaking of need, greed, oppression, desires, and pride, have transferred to the state of nature ideas they have acquired in society; they speak of savage man and they depict civil man.” (Rousseau 9)
Rousseau begins his Discourse on the Origin and Foundations of Inequality Among Men by first describing his concept of the physical situation of humans in the State of Nature. Like Hobbes, Rousseau sees this existence as a largely solitary one. Unlike Hobbes poor, nasty, brutish existence, however, he understands a typical day for this primitive being, which he calls “savage man”, as “eating his fill under an oak tree, quenching his thirst at the first stream, making his bed at the foot of the same tree which furnished his meal, with all his needs satisfied.” (Rousseau