Hobbes Vs Locke

Thomas Hobbes was born in London in the year of 1588. He went to the College of Oxford

University in England, where he studied classics. Hobbes traveled to many other European

countries to meet with scientists and to study different forms of government. During his time

outside of England Hobbes became interested in why people allowed themselves to be ruled and

what would be the best form of government for England.

John Locke was the son of a country attorney and grew up during the civil disturbances which

were plaguing 17th century England. He attended Christ Church, Oxford, where he remained a

student for many years, becoming increasingly disenchanted with the scholastic curriculum

offered there. Locke became interested in the great philosophical and scientific questions of his

time and this interest brought him into contact with distinguished scientists such as Robert Boyle.

He was elected a fellow of the Royal Society in 1668 and it was then he began to form his views

on politics and religion.

Both men were great thinkers of their time, but held very different opinions on politics and many

other facets of life and man. Both of these men were theorists on natural law and social contracts,

but this is where the resemblance between the two ends. The time in which these two men lived

can account for the pessimistic views of Hobbes on the nature of man and the ideal form of

government. Locke, however, held very different views on these subjects, offering fairly more

realistic and optimistic words about them. Locke believed that men are born with basic rights,

while Hobbes believes that men are born with no rights at all. Locke theorized that, man will exist

in peace, and will naturally exist to help himself survive and not get in the way of others in their

identical pursuit. Hobbes, on the other hand, believed that men lived basically for self-

preservation, and that they exist in a constant state of war. He also thought that the opposing

forces of each individual man neutralize each other, and that men need to form a government to

be kept in line. On this note, Locke believes that man is naturally social, and that men will form a

government whose basic purpose is to serve the rights and common good of the people.

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were two main political philosophers during the seventeenth

century. Hobbes is the well known author of "Leviathan," and Locke is the author of "An Essay

Concerning Human Understanding." In their essays, both men address the characteristics of man,

natural law, and the purpose and structure of government. The two men have very different

opinions of the characteristics of man. Hobbes sees man as being evil, whereas Locke views man

in a much more optimistic light. They both agree that all men are equal according to natural law.

However, their ideas of natural law differ greatly. Hobbes sees natural law as a state of war in

which "every man is a enemy to every man." Locke on the other hand, sees natural law as a state

of equality and freedom. Locke therefore believes that government is necessary in order to

preserve natural law, and on the contrary, Hobbes sees government as necessary in order to

control natural law.

Hobbes and Locke see mankind's natural characteristics in two very different ways. Hobbes

describes the life of man as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and shortÐ'...". He obviously does not

think very highly man. He also says that it is hard for men to "believe there be many so wise as

themselves," expressing his discontent with how selfish men are. Conversely, Locke views

mankind's natural characteristics much more optimistically. Locke sees men as being governed

"according to reason." He perceives men to be thinking, capable individuals that can coexist

peacefully. Hobbes and Locke disagree on mankind's