Not exactly creative, but it's writing. :P

Locke & Hobbes

Both Thomas Hobbes and John Locke believed that there should be a form of government. However, the two philosophers differed in opinion on what form of government was needed.

John Locke argued that the government must be influenced by citizens of a nation or state. He believed that it was the government’s responsibility to care for the citizens’s needs. If the government failed to do so, the people had a right to revolt and overthrow their government. Locke also believed that because people were equal, and had similar conscience’s that they would be able to coexist peaceably within nature.

Thomas Hobbes was a strong supporter of an absolute monarchy. He argued that once the citizens’s placed power with a ruler, it must stay. The citizens’s would be denied the ability to revolt or regain power. Hobbes believed that an absolute ruler was necessary, because he considered mankind as any other savage beast. He argued that humans are naturally selfish and inately wicked, therefore the strong authority was required in order to keep mankind in check. The title Leviathan comes from this belief. Hobbes compared a successful government to a large sea monster: fierce, strong, and powerful.

The two men were influenced by the events that came to pass during their lifetimes. Hobbes experienced the English Civil War and Locke observed the Glorious Revolution. The English Civil War (1642-1651) was a time of great turmoil in England that ultimately led to the rule of Oliver Cromwell. Cromwell’s behavior caused many, including Hobbes, to support a monarchy. Locke, however, witnessed the Glorious Revolution (1688). No monarch has had absolute reign since the revolution. Thus began the practice of parliamentary democracy.

I find that I agree with John Locke and his beliefs. Larger governments hold more power than necessary. If you allow one person, or a small group of people, to make many decisions concerning the entire population, the populace will suffer. We, as humans, are raised to believe we are all equal to one another.

The vast majority of humanity understands their natural rights and pursue them. Few people attempt to hinder another’s pursuit, unless wronged. This also falls under Locke’s doctrine. We, the wronged, are the ones to punish those who have wronged us. In larger governments, those who have wronged another do not have their actions reciprocated properly. The judgement is left in the hands of one man, or a small group of people, rather than his peers or those wronged by him.

Locke argues that mankind can leave peaceably, and I find that I agree. Even in today’s society, the majority of the population live harmonious lives. Very few people witness crimes or wrongdoing. Mankind knows instinctively the difference between wrong and right, as stated by Locke.

Hobbes’ idea of an absolute leader and of human nature is jaded, to say the least. He witnessed chaos during his life and believed that a strong leader would have stopped it. Humans are not purely selfish creatures, nor are we savage beasts that need a master to guide us in all we do.

Labels: civilization, class, history, hobbes, locke, philosophy