nature is more clear-cut. Rousseau is discussed separately, but in relation to the other two,
while Hume is an overall critic.
Hobbes and Locke agree on two basic assumptions regarding human nature which
they equate with the condition before the social contract which is referred to as the State of
Nature. First, men are rational and therefore able to reckon what is best for them. Second,
men are free and more or less equal. Free because there is no overarching authority and equal
because brute force can be balanced by cunningness. However, they hold fundamentally
different ideas on what the State of Nature looks like. For Hobbes, it is a condition of
‘continuall feare, and danger of violent death; And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty,
brutish, and short’. 3 The preservation of his life- the Right of Nature- would be the primary
consideration of every individual and being a rational egotist- and effectively in the possession
of absolute individual rights (where right for Hobbes means liberty while law obligation) 4 - he
will understand that the best way to assure this is by dominating all others. Thus, the State of
Nature is a constant state of war. However, human nature has another side contrary to this
asocial one. A side characterized by ambition that can only be satisfied in the framework of a
stable society. 5 Locke paints a different picture where life in the State of Nature is social to an
extend that people would be able to recognise by grace of the Natural Law (G od’s plan) that
in order to be entitled to Natural Rights- the right to life, liberty and property- they need to
respect that these rights apply to others too. Moreover, the state of Nature involves economic
interdependence and social stratification regardless of the absence of a law enforcing
authority, something that renders it more hospitable than Hobbes would allow. Nevertheless,
3 Thomas Hobbes, and J. C. A. (John Charles Addison) Gaskin, Leviathan (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998), p. 57. 4 Francis Edward Devine, ‘Absolute Democracy or Indefeasible Right: Hobbes Versus Locke’, The Journal of Politics, 37.3 (1975), 736-768 (p. 746). 5 J.S. McClelland, A History of Western Political Thought (London: Routledge, 1996), pp. 193-195.
26
Made with FlippingBook HTML5