Comparison of Locke and Hobbes
Can bring in Rousseau if necessary
Could use to help what Locke is saying
For my final paper, I will be comparing and contrasting the works of Hobbes and Locke. When looking at their works throughout the term, I was immediately drawn to their contrasting styles and the way in which each of them present their arguments. Even on the simple thought of man and human nature, we see how Locke sees more good in men as opposed to Hobbes who feels like men are in a constant state of war. When digging deeper into these two, we can see the differences in their views of rights, and to whom those rights belong to. With Hobbes, I will talk about the idea of relinquishing certain rights to the government, in return for protection. With Locke, I will talk about his contrasting view of how he feels like all humans are born with rights that should protect them, therefore they should not be giving up these rights to the government. Locke also shifts his viewpoint to the idea of rights shifting into powers, which poses an interesting argument to look at if rights are truly powers? Because of these contrasting view points, there is definitely pros and cons to each philosophers point of view. I may or may not bring Rousseau into the equation, as his point of view can help push the argument for Locke. Rousseau’s stance on community is that good laws make good citizens, therefore if the laws are already in place, there is no need to relinquish your rights, as Locke says. I do not think I need to include Rousseau as there is ample to write about with Locke and Hobbes, but I might add him if I want to strengthen my argument with Locke.
Teachers Response to Proposal:
Good topic. I would stick to H&L — Rousseau could be used in a supporting role.
one difference between Rousseau and Locke is that Locke believes that rights precede the state, while Rousseau believes that the state is necessary to establish rights.
With respect to H’L: contrast their states of nature (locke has both a state of nature and a state of war); do emphasize the difference in their concepts of rights; contrast H’s imperative of safety/security with L’s emphasis on justice and values.
You might play with H’s sense of expectation vs. L’s sense of trust.
Careful on Loke’s sense of rights and powers — certainly Hobbes has that perspective. Locke’s is a bit more ambiguous.
What about their similar and different views of political legitimacy — consent, representation, authority.
What is the role of government for each? Who is the sovereign?
