John Locke Social Contract Essay

In terms of the American political system, the most significant of the theories of the origin of the state is that of the ‘Social Contract”. Philosophers such as Thomas Hobbes, James Harrington, and John Locke in england and Jean Jacques Rousseau in France developed this theory in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

Locke’s idea of the state of nature men had kept their promises and honoured their obligations. In locke’s first treatise he argued that there was no divine right for monarchs, because God didn't put men above others and therefore everyone was equal. In his second treatise he strikes Hobbes and speaks his thought on the state of nature “man is free and in this condition all men equal”. For Locke, in the state of nature all men are free to order their actions, of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the of the law of nature. This idea influenced him to believe that human nature is represented by reason and tolerance the reasoning was "The state of Nature has a law of Nature to govern it", and that law is the reason. Much different than Hobbes, who had believed people were selfish and needed to be

What would the American government be like today if it was not for the mind and political theory of John Locke? Some historians and philosophers believe that without John Locke our government would only be a shadow of what it is today. Arguably, one of his most important political and philosophical works was his Two Treatises of Government. There he argues that the function of the state is to protect the natural rights of its citizens, primarily to protect the right to property. John Locke, in many eyes, can be viewed as one of the father’s of Democracy. He embraced many of ideas in his theories on the state of nature and the rise of political society today. In Locke’s political society,

His writings had a great impact in the perception of the leaders of America. John Locke was an English philosopher who highly influenced the Founding Fathers. He highly believed in natural science and in the growing middle class and represented the principles of the Enlightenment. In an essay Locke wrote concerning human understanding in 1690, Locke denied the idea of native beliefs and argued that every individual is born with a blank mind and that it is the environment that shapes the individual. Thomas Hobbes 's belief that kings govern by divine power was rejected by Locke. He believed that every human being was born equal and that the surroundings in the environment was what molded everyone. Locke argued that people are blessed with some natural rights such as liberty, life, and property. Locke was the philosopher that exposed the concept of governmental checks and balances which later became the foundation for the U. S. Constitution.

These intellectuals attempted to generate an explanation for the purpose of government and expressed their ideal political structure to find a solution to the inequalities in the distribution of power. The changing intellectual and social perceptions of the human condition led to new insights and questions of the way in which humans were ruled: “Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” (Rousseau 2). This conveys The Philosophe belief that liberty is lost when political rule is too strict, to the point where one is unable to truly live. John Locke deduced in his two Treatises on Government that humans have natural born rights to life, liberty and property (“Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau on Government”). His ideal government protected these natural rights and permitted the freedom of its people to conduct their lives in a way that they see as best fit. He believed that the government existed to serve the people’s will, thus the power laid in the majority (“Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau on Government”). Thomas Hobbes had an opposing view to that of Locke’s government. Hobbes advocated for the monarchy and absolutism, as this form provides strong political stability (Elahi 2). He believed that the people were indebted to the government and protected by the ruler, only if they surrendered their rights and freedoms under a social contract (Elahi 3). Jean

Locke’s document and the declaration of independence have the same intent, almost the same wording, and the same result they are essentially the same document. With the documents provided, it can be inferred that both documents are extremely alike in wording, and intention. Locke and Jefferson had similar ideas due to the issues facing colonial times, with the random taxation, strict laws, and unnecessary force. John locke’s social contract highly influenced the Declaration of Independence, by taking the principal rights of his document and only slightly editing them to become the Declaration of Independence.

John Locke, view on natural laws and the human nature was quite simple his philosophy states that all humans must simple live by the natural law. His approach was based on ethics and not obligation, it is an individual’s right to preserve themselves to reach his own good, and as well have the opportunity as they wish. Locke believed that the humans was happy for the most part that there is peace in the heart

The views of John Locke on the topic of slavery vary drastically from the actual events that took place in the United States. The experiences of Fredrick Douglas give truth to this statement. In Locke 's Second Treatise of Government, he expresses the freedom that all men should have as long as they abide by the common rule of the society. In actuality, slaves may have done nothing wrong, but their freedom was still taken away from them. John Locke believed slavery should be a form of punishment for those who committed a crime worthy of death and anyone who committed such a crime should become a slave. Fredrick Douglas teaches us that what really took place in the United States was an unfair practice of kidnapping, then buying and

John Locke and Thomas Hobbes are often viewed as opposites, great philosophers who disagreed vehemently on the nature and power of government, as well as the state of nature from which government sprung. Hobbes’ Leviathan makes the case for absolute monarchy, while Locke’s Second Treatise of Government argues for a more limited, more representative society. However, though they differ on certain key points, the governments envisioned by both philosophers are far more alike than they initially appear. Though Hobbes and Locke disagree as to the duration of the social contract, they largely agree in both the powers it grants to a sovereign and the state of nature that compels its creation.

"The current federal system of government in the United States is failing to meet its social contract obligations to the American people." There is nothing closer to the truth than this statement. While some may argue that the government is following the guidelines of a social contract, many aspects of the government have outgrown their britches and taken over.

Philosophers have always been a great influence in the history of the world. Both Thomas Hobbes (1558-1679) and John Locke (1632-1701) established the framework of their ideas on social contract in the thought of the condition of nature. Their hypothetical support for the formation of a common government gets from certain states of the condition of nature that requires the making of the political body. In this manner, so as to comprehend the political thought about these two creators it is key to concentrate on their origination of the condition of nature. Hobbes and Locke have diverse thoughts with respect to the condition of nature, which has imperative ramifications in their perspective of the social contract. Both creators utilize the sensible instrument of the condition of nature, however they do it another way, subsequently achieve distinctive conclusions. In this exposition the center will be put on the contrast amongst Locke's and Hobbes' thoughts of the condition of nature, and its suggestions for their hypothesis of the social contract, of human instinct, and profound quality.

Thomas Hobbes creates a clear idea of the social contract theory in which the social contract is a collective agreement where everyone in the state of nature comes together and sacrifices all their liberty in return to security. “In return, the State promises to exercise its absolute power to maintain a state of peace (by punishing deviants, etc.)” So are the power and the ability of the state making people obey to the laws or is there a wider context to this? I am going to look at the different factors to this argument including a wide range of critiques about Hobbes’ theory to see whether or not his theory is convincing reason for constantly obeying the law.

The quality of your individual life would greatly improve in utopia. The burdens you face from corporate monopolies, the overwhelming weight of the devaluation of your currency and the lack of faith in your neighbors to achieve a civilization of peace and mutual respect has taken its toll for too long. Although this sounds as if it was taken directly from George Orwell’s book (1984) itself, the propaganda of a utopian government rule and the current everlasting war breathes as it’s on self-reliant organization today. Weary of the multiple political parties that are emerging every three seconds, we are faced with a question that has been proposed since the beginning of logical thinking. Is it

     Rousseau's principal aim in writing The Social Contract is to determine how freedom may be possible in civil society, and we might do well to pause briefly and understand what he means by "freedom." In the state of nature we enjoy the physical freedom of having no restraints on our behavior. By entering into the social contract, we place restraints on our behavior, which make it possible to live in a community. By giving up our physical freedom, however, we gain the civil freedom of being able to think rationally. We can put a check on our impulses and desires, and thus learn to think morally. The term "morality" only has significance within the confines of civil

On the formation of the Social Contract Theory has a long history, many people have formed Social Contract Theory has made a great contribution. Thomas Hobbes as one of the representatives of Modern Social Contract Theory, his departure from the theory of human nature, to a fictional state of nature as a starting point, put forward the basic principles of natural law, natural rights, and then through the Social Contract Theory, the establishment of his country theory. Thomas Hobbes certain extent, played a significant role, for people to bring enlightenment. But his theory does not apply in all cases; we need to analyze different aspects of different problems. In this essay, I will describe the Social Contract Theory, and explain the problem of how do we get out of the State of Nature raised by Hobbes Game. I explain the idea of cooperation that Thomas Hobbes can give to this problem, and then argue that this is not a satisfactory response to the problem for three reasons.