Study On Liberals Locke And Hobbes

Study on Liberals Locke and Hobbes

In the following essay the political theories of these two classic authors, Locke and Hobbes, will be compared through the analysis and understanding of the works of the same. Similarly, the importance of this comparison will be analyzed to understand contemporary political phenomena and in this way the similarities and deferences that lie in the theories mentioned.

Similarly, it is initially highlighted that both Locke and Hobbes begin their theories describing a state, prior to social formation. This is understood as "state of nature", and in this the foundations are created to base their social theories. On the one hand, Locke affirms that the state of nature of each person can be understood as

of perfect freedom for each one to order their actions and have possessions and persons as appropriate, within the limits of natural law without asking anyone or depending on the will of any other man ”  

Similarly, when everyone can enjoy the power of jurisdiction and there are no inequalities, it is called precisely "state of equality". For Locke equality comes from the natural condition of man, since they were born to enjoy all natural advantages. It is for this reason that within this theory there is no subject or subordination of one people over others, and it would not have to have it.

However, with the aforementioned we can infer that Locke’s political theory is initially based on the principle of equality, and that this is born by the natural state of man of man.

All, of the same species and born to enjoy the same faculties, there should be no support from each other.

In contrast to Locke, Hobbes exposes a theory where he indicates that, "men are more equal than unequal" (1965, p 134). However, he affirms that distrust will proceed and, therefore, there will always be a conflict. As soon as one man wishes to be superior to another or possess more than his neighbor and this object is only consumption and benefit for one, these two will become enemies. Subsequently they will try to protect themselves so that no other power can attempt against them.

In this way we find in the state of nature exposed by Hobbes the three main causes of discord;competition, distrust and glory. The first drives them to attack, the second to seek security and the third to gain recognition. Then once again, differing with Locke, Hobbes postulate.

Now moving to the contractualist environment and the one that postulates the origin of the State, we can refer to the most famous work of Hobbes, the Leviathan. In this we can notice the way in which the State is described and the reasons why it is essential that it intervenes directly over the people. Starting because Hobbes postulates that ‘man is a wolf for man’ (1965) Hobbes indicates that peace and social union can be achieved when they are established in a social contract, in which a centralized power that the authority has the authority is definedabsolute to protect society, creating a civilized community. The State is then necessary to exercise strength and power.

This thought clearly differs with Locke’s ideology, since this postulate that the State should not have any intervention on economic and social aspects. It is also stated that as long as there is equality, man cannot develop due to the situation of war and discord that there will be

Each offense that can be committed in the state of nature can be punished to the same extent that it can be within a state;Well, although it would exceed the limits of my present purpose to find in the individuals of the Law of Nature or in its degrees of punishment, it is evident, in any case, that said law exists, and that it is so intelligible and clear for a rational creatureand for a scholar of the positive laws of the states.  

However, it is stated that man has the capacity to send on his possessions and resources, but he does not have the ability to decide on his life or any other, this due once again, to the natural law.

It should be noted that the ideas presented both by Locke and Hobbes differ greatly, it can be understood in essence taking into account that on the one hand, Hobbes is exposing that the human being must overcome, must overcome others and demonstrate his mandate in order to beRespected and never questioned, thus creating a ruler and, on the other hand, is located, explaining that the human being must remain in a state of equality in which man should not overcome others due to the natural law that ishas granted since its creation.

Since everything mentioned above has been understood, it will be more practical to carry out an analysis and expose certain opinions and views that can differ with any of the readers. Then it is wise to mention that Locke’s ideology may be the most appropriate, but at the same time, the most utopian. Things do not develop in such a way as expected. On the other hand, the feeling of power and need to generate something lartoday.