Sociology.com: Difference between Lock and Hobbes State of Nature

Home

  • E library
  • Job Corner
  • Newspapers

Difference between Lock and Hobbes State of Nature

Hobbes State of Nature: Thomas Hobbes occupied the most important place in the history of modern English political thought. Hobbes is rightly regarded as the originator of modern political philosophy. Hobbes was born in 1588 and died in 1679. The idea of the state of nature prior to the appearance of social or political life was known before Hobbes. Hobbes “state of nature” was a pre-civil nonpolitical condition of mankind. His state of nature the state or condition was very unsatisfactory and intolerable. State was perpetual war where every man was an enemy to every man. Men live without proper security. There is no culture of the earth. No navigation and no commodious building.

Lockes State of Nature: John Lock was an English philosopher. His ideas had enormous influence on the development of epistemology and political philosophy. He is widely regarded as one of the most influential enlightenment thinkers and contributors to liberal theory. His writings influence Voltaire and Rousseau as well as the American revolutionaries. His notable theories are state of nature. Locke believes that man is a rational and social creature. He feels sympathy love and tenderness towards his fellow- being he wants to live in peace and harmony with others and feels bound to them by ties of social cohesion. To Locke the state of nature is a state of Good will mutual assistance and preservation.

The difference between Hobbes state of nature and Locke’s State of nature are mentioned below-



Hobbes State of Nature
Locke State of Nature
The state or condition was very unsatisfactory and intolerable.
It represents a pre-political rather than a pre-social condition.
A state of perpetual war.
A state is not war but a peace.
Men are not equal in power.
Every man is equal.
Men live without proper security.
Men live proper security.
Every man was an enemy to everyman.
Everyman lives with peacefully.
There is no culture of the earth.
There is culture are existed on the earth.
No navigation
Navigation is existed.
No commodious building
Commodious building are
No arts and letters
Arts and letters are valuable
No society
There are existing the society
Natural creature
Rational being and social creature.
The life of men is solitary poor, nasty, brutish and short.
It provided moral standard for social action.
There was only the law of nature.
It was the law of nature that regulated man.
Determine the way of life in the horrible state.
This law of nature based on reason and its object was to preserved society.
There is no freedom for men
State of perfect freedom for men
There was continuous competitions to fulfill the need of their.
There was no government who could administer those laws and regulations.
There is no common superior to hold in awe
There is common power over men
There were no legal rights, no wrong, and no justice.
There were exist human right and moral duty
State of anarchy and war
State of good will mutual assistance
Everybody had a fear that anyone to more powerful and executed than others
There was no competition.


Finally we can say that Hobbes state of nature here the life of man nasty, brutish and there is no peace. But, Lockes state of nature every men are equal who possess equal, natural right and the state of good will, mutual assistance.