Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean Jacques Rousseau
Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean Jacques Rousseau theorized about man in the
state of nature, the forces that led natural man to form a social contract and the government that
should be formed because of such a contract. The Bible also provided the social contract
theorists with ideas. The Garden of Eden placed early man in a "state of nature" and even
provided a way for him to move from a primitive state to a civilized state. The Old Testament
also has numerous references to covenants that existed between Jehovah and individuals and
between Jehovah and his chosen people. 1 The social contract theory was used extensively in the
late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries by political philosophers to popularize the belief
that governments were obligated to the people. This theory maintained that the people had
originally formed governments, had set their limits, and were allowing them to continue to
operate. Governments owed their existence not to God and not to kings, but to the people. The
social contract theorists tried to explain how political obligations were formed by men in a pre-
political state (Ake 1970, 463).
In Leviathan, Hobbes emphasized on the importance of separating the immanent and the
transcendental states of nature. The immanent state of nature according to Hobbes relates to the
religious understanding of natural law which many medieval Christian natural law theorists
proposed (Sorrell 1996). Hobbes believed that both states of nature exist concurrently, but it is
important to separate human nature from social life because moral motivation as well as political
obligations differ from one individual to the next. Hobbes argued that individuals commonly
leave the law of nature whenever they get to interact with others. Hobbes further postulated that
in the context of social interactions, individuals usually get to rely on their natural qualities,
1 Genesis 2:8-16, 3:6-23. Exodus 31:16.
however, social life ends up significant impacts on their qualities. It is for such reasons that
Hobbes proposes the superiority of positive law (Edwards 2002)
According to Hobbes, The “fundamental law of nature” is “that every man, ought to
endeavor peace, as far as he hope of obtaining it,” 2 but for this law to be enforced there needs to
be agreements or “covenants,” and men have to “perform their covenants made,” otherwise “we
are still in a condition of war.” 3 on the equality and tolerance Hobbes said that in this
environment men are all equal, have access to the same things, and they are all able to decide
what is right or wrong without exception. They are equally free, and so equally able to use any
means they wish that will help them get what they desire.4
Hobbes believed that a government headed by a kind is the best form of government.
Placing more power in the hands of king would mean more resolute and consistent exercise of
power. Hobbes also argues that social contract is maintained among the people not between the
people and king. Once the power had been given to the king, they had no right to revolt against
him. On religion and government affairs, Hobbes maintained that religion is the source of civil
war, thus, religion must be a department under king which oversea religious affairs.
John Lock, in his work said man in the state of nature born without ideas or knowledge,
the natural man was brought through his experiences from a primitive, ignorant state, to a
civilized reasonable state. Locke did not believe in innate ideas, but he did believe that God had
given man something. "The voice of God in man" was man's ability to reason (Gough 1950).
Lock said through his power to reason man could gain ever expanding knowledge.
2 Hobbes, 1946: XIV, 85
3 ibid: XV, 93
4 ibid: XIII, 82
Unlike Hobbes, On the government, Locke in the “Two Treatises” not only justified the
Glorious Revolution, disclaiming divine right and absolute monarchy in favor of a representative
form of government; he also tried to assert the right of the people to resist their rulers when they
were misruled by them and to form a legal government that would rule them as people with
certain rights.5
Locke also used the state of nature as a tool. And, like Hobbes, Locke gave natural man
the characteristics he wanted them to have to fit the government he had already erected for them.
Hobbes described man's state of nature in brutal, frightening terms, but Locke maintained that; a
state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons as
they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon
the will of any other man.6
Hobbes and Locke both saw that the need for government grew because of the state of
nature. They disagreed on the cause. Hobbes said government was a necessary but artificial
device to solve the problems in the state of nature. For Locke, government was a rational remedy
for the inconveniences man found in the state of nature (Dunn 1969, 118).
Locke said that men in the state of nature made two contracts with each other. The first,
was when men united to make a community. The second contract was made by the community to
set up an actual government, which could take any of various forms. Since the community
created the government, it could be overthrown and a new government instituted without
affecting the stability of the community at all (Copleston, 1993, 135). On the government power,
5 Locke, Two Treatises, p. 68.
6 Locke, Two Treatises, p. 287
Lock said, the only rights or powers a government could have are those the people under that
government consented to give.
Rousseau said Hobbes saw natural man as a robust child who fights and always grabs
what he wants. Rousseau disagreed with Hobbes's analogy, (Bertram 2013) saying man was like
a robust child, strong and independent, and because he was strong that he could be independent,
fearing no one. Rousseau claimed savage man had no need to fear because he was strong and
independent of others.7
On religion-government affairs, Rousseau held that traditional natural law in Christian
religion can no longer be trusted. He proposed to removal of Christian religion from public life
all together as the best mean to freeing state from a set of ideas that made people too concerned
about the afterlife (Chupp 2021). On social contract, Rousseau said that when men finally came
together to make a contract and form a government, they did not intend to give to the
government any arbitrary power. Unlike Locke's contract, Rousseau's was not an agreement
between people to give up their right to govern themselves, but an agreement to cooperate and
"concentrate all their wills in one". 8 Rousseau described the social contract as the total alienation
of each person's rights to the whole community. By this act, all men became equal; by giving
themselves to all, they gave themselves to no one. 9
Bibliography:
7 Rousseau, Origin of Inequality, p. 343
8 Martin, French Thought, p. 207
9 Rousseau, Social Contract, pp. 391-392
Ake, Claude "Social Contract Theory and The Problem of Politicization: The Case of Hobbes,"
Western Political Quarterly 23 (September 1970): 463.
Bertram, Christopher. “Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Rousseau and the Social Contract.”
Hoboken: Taylor and Francis, 2013.
Chupp, Jesse. “Early Modern Secular Natural Law: Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau.” Liberty
University. 2021
Copleston, Frederick. “A History of Philosophy.” Westminster, Maryland: The Newman Press,
1961.
Dunn, John. “The Political Thought of John Locke.” Cambridge: At the University Press, 1969.
Edwards, Alistair. “Hobbes” in Interpreting Modern Political Philosophy: From Machiavelli to
Marx, eds. An Edwards and J Townshend (Palgrave Macmillan, Houndmills) 2002.
Gough, J. W. “John Locke’s Political Philosophy.” Eight Studies Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1950.
Hobbes, Thomas. “Oxford: Hobbes, Thomas. Oxford: Leviathan.” Introduced by Michael
Oakeshott. Basil Blackwell, 1946.
Locke, John. “Two Treatises of Government.” Edited by Peter Laslett. Cambridge: At the
University Press, 1970.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques, John T. Scott, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. “The Major Political
Writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau: The Two Discourses and the Social Contract.” The
University of Chicago Press, 2012.
Rousseau, Jean Jacques. “The Social Contract or Principles of v/ Political Right.” Translated and
Introduced by Maurice. Cranston. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books, 1968.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. “A Discourse on Inequality.” New York: Philosophical Library, 2016.
Sorrell, Tom. “The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes.” (Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge) 1996.
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
