Kant Vs Hobbes

John Locke and Thomas Hobbes are one of the most influential and famous philosophers who both had similar theories but had different conclusions. The two philosophers wrote a discourse “life in the state of nature” and argued about the government. They both had made important and logical contributions to modern philosophy and opened up political thoughts which have impacted our world today. During the seventeenth century the thought of political philosophy became a big topic. John Locke and Thomas Hobbes both started questioning the political philosophy and had had different views and reasoning towards human beings. Both Hobbes and Locke had logical and reasonable theories in which they had opposed to one another. Although each philosopher

Thomas Hobbes and john Locke were both enlightment philosophers who use the state of nature as a formula in political philosophy. Both Locke and Hobbes had tried to influence by their sociopolitical background, “to expose the man as he was before the advent of the social life” (). Locke and Hobbes addressed man’s relation to the society around him; however, they came to different conclusions regarding the nature of human government.

mmanuel Kant and Thomas Hobbes were both prominent philosophers who dedicated much of their writing to ethics and morality. Although they both believed that reason is an important part in morality, they disagreed over the exact role it played. Kant’s philosophical thoughts, described in his work, The Good Will and Categorical Imperative, define will as being central to the foundation of morality. Kant argued that morality originates from rationality and should be based against a standard, the “Categorical Imperative”. Hobbes, on the other hand, argued that morality arises from mutual consent and not from human desires. In his work, Leviathan, he stated that the human nature is such that drives people to constantly be at war with each other.

Locke and Hobbes started with a central notion that people with similar “state of nature” would on their own accord come together as a state. Locke believed that individual would not perpetually be at war with each other. He believed humans began with a state of natural characteristics of absolute freedom with no government in site. Hobbes work differs from that of Locke’s because he felt people needed a strong central authority to ward off the inherent evil and anarchic state of man. Locke believed that within the state of nature man would have stronger morals and thus limit their actions. Locke also, credited people with the ability to do the right thing within a group. And the natural rights and civil society where Hobbes differentiated with this by believing that people had to resolve their natural rights and the their were privileges granted by the sovereign. Locke believed the relationship between citizens and government took the form of a social contract, in which in exchange for order and protections provided by institutions the citizens agree to surrender some of the freedoms within the state of nature. This was also, agreed that power of the state was not absolute but exercised according to law. If broken by the state it forfeits and the contract becomes void. This allots for the citizens of the state to have a “voice” and power for change to replace the government with moral obligation by the governed. Hobbes believed absolute power was the price man should

While both men believe that the good in human nature is maintained through some higher form of governing, Locke has trust and confidence in the good of man and believes in limited monarchy, whereas Hobbes promotes a tough sovereign-led government to avoid a continuous state of war.

Influential philosophers were not uncommon in the seventeenth century. Two British political thinkers, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, though opposite in many ways, both had one shared legacy: both men greatly influenced the politicians of America and laid a foundation of what would one day become the American government. While both men did some heavily influencing, they too witnessed events that forged their worldviews. Hobbes began writing after the English Civil War where King Charles I was beheaded, and the civil government came to an end. It was then that Hobbes concluded that humans do not possess the capabilities to live at peace with one another. Locke wrote considering the Glorious and Bloodless Revolution where King James II of England was ousted and there was no considerable violence. When learning about their theories on government, it is crucial to consider these factors to understand the context and reasoning behind them.

To Locke, the “State of Nature” is a state in which every human being is his own king, who answers to no higher authority than his own conscience and will. Although this “State of Nature” offers complete freedom; this freedom is accompanied by an amorphous mass of fears and insecurities that stem from devolution that Locke called the “State of War”. The “State of War” occurs when one individual tyrannizes another (either to enslave him or to take over his property) and the victim of this relationship rightfully decides to defend himself. In the “State of War” the tyrant tries to deprive the individual of the rights that he is naturally entitled to.

Both Thomas Hobbes and John Locke have impacted politics in a way that has affected how the world is today. These two individuals have shaped government as we now know it by introducing the idea of popular contract, which states that the government gets its power from the people.These two men are very similar in some ways. They were both educated men who believed that government is a necessity. However, they had very different views on life. Hobbes view was a darker view. He says that men form government as a method of self-preservation, that they are fearful for their lives, so they form a government as a means of protection. He believes that government is based on fear. Men who are scared to go into battle will go because they are more scared

However, they both believed that man needs a government in order to keep their country from falling apart. Also, each of them was able to impact society. While Hobbes impacted the English and French government at the time, who both had a monarchy, Locke's ideas influenced the United States Constitution. In sum, Locke and Hobbes were both brilliant philosophers who disagreed on core beliefs about human nature, society and government but each were able to influence the world around them and the

John Locke embraced many of the ideas presented by Hobbes in his theories on the state of nature and the rise of government. They differed however, in that Locke believed that God was the prime factor in politics. He believed that individuals were born with certain rights given not by government or society, but by God. This he said, is what gives all people equality.

Hobbes’ philosophy was centered around his beliefs and learnings mainly. Hobbes’ developed many works that are even used today for reference and reasoning. “Leviathan” is an example of one of Hobbes’ many works that shared his belief on absolute rule. For example, as stated in an article from Britannica Academy the following is stated about Hobbes’ beliefs “Hobbes started with a severe view of human nature: all of man’s voluntary acts are aimed at pleasure or self-preservation. This position is known as psychological hedonism”. This illustrates the fact that Thomas Hobbes believed humanity was far too flawed and selfish to function in the absence of an absolute ruler’s power. He was also opposed to the separation of powers, (as stated in Britannica Academy, Thomas Hobbes: Exile in Paris) “ He was firmly against the separation of government powers, either between branches of government or between church and state.” Therefore he was completely opposed to the idea of democracy as well. However, Hobbes believed that everyone should be equal under the law, except the king of course. As a result of his way of thinking many people at his time disagreed with Thomas and still do. Therefore he didn’t have much of an impact on his country at this time, considering his unique beliefs some even thought his beliefs were ludicrous.

The ideas presented by Hobbes and Locke are often in opposition. Hobbes views humanity much more pessimistically; viewing men as evil according to natural law and government a way to eliminate natural law. Locke takes a much more optimistic stance; viewing government a means to preserve the state of nature and enhance it as men are naturally peaceful and equal. Discarding the differences in ideology, their ideas were radical for their time. The interest they took in natural law, man's natural characteristics, and the role of government, provided inspiration for, and was the focus of many literary works for the future.

Thomas Hobbes will call for a form of government in which the people would yield all of their rights and have little to no freedom of their own. In Hobbes mind, these men will freely give up many freedoms to escape the chaotic and selfish state of nature. He believes that this is the only viable option for men because of his understanding of the self-serving and desperate nature of men. Hobbes will specify that the relinquishing of power is important to lower the chances of an uprising of the ruled, which he believes, will revert men to this “state of nature.” Hobbes would go on the write that the men being ruled should have no religious freedom to prevent uprisings as well. Locke will have a much different solution to the issues of living in nature. The proposition made by Locke differs from the absolute monarchy called for by Hobbes. In the society Locke calls for the focus is to maintain the natural rights he specifies in his understanding of nature, these rights are ones of, life, liberty, and possession. The ruler should be held accountable for and by the ones he serves and when acting against these rights should be replaced, according to

In his state of nature people were wicked, selfish, and cruel, would act on behalf of their best interests, and could not be trusted to govern themselves. This state of nature is a “war of all against all,” people will constantly destroy each other in a pursuit of power. The purpose of Hobbes’ government was to keep law and order. John Locke on the other hand favored a representative government, such as a Democracy. Hobbes believed humans were free naturally, and had a foundation independent of any government.

“Everyone is governed by his own reason, and there is nothing he can make use of that may not be a help unto him in preserving his life against his enemies (Hobbes, 120).” Thomas Hobbes, who is a considered a rational egoist, makes this point in his book Leviathan. Hobbes believes that the means of person’s actions can only be amounted to how it ultimately affects that person. Our moral duties that we perform in the end, all stem from self-interest, rather than being justified as morally right or wrong. Hobbes states that our desires pit us against one another, and the only way to protect our self-interests is to create a common power that protects the people who consent to it.