State of Human Nature - A Comparative Study of Hobbes, Rousseau and Locke

Running head: STATE OF HUMAN NATURE
STATE OF HUMAN NATURE
Name of Student
Name of University
Author note

1STATE OF HUMAN NATURE
Human nature is one of the complex theories that has made the minds wonder. The
purpose of the existence and who they actually are have been the prime subject of thought for
philosophers since the ancient times. The philosophers have provided different interpretations
of the human nature, which are different from each other according to the time they live in or
the society that they belong to. Understanding of human nature and their relationship to the
society and each other have researched over time, considering the facts how they interpret
societal changes or different interactions and emotions. However, there are three philosophers
who have deeply interpreted the human nature from the study of human interactions and their
political reactions (Murphy and Adrian). Each of the philosophers viewed human beings from
different angles and explained their impact on the political aspects of the society. These three
philosophers who are to be discussed in this assignment are Thomas Hobbes, Jean Jacques
Rousseau and John Locke. The discussion will compare and contrast how each of them
described human nature. It will also focus on the aspect of human nature in the political
scenarios and the relation between people. Finally a conclusion can be drawn from the
discussion which can summarise the different aspects of human nature according to the three
philosophers and how it affects the society from different points of view.
Human nature is one of the most complex ideas to understand. According to Hobbes,
the human beings have the urge for the desire of power and to sustain their life in a good
manner. Moreover, Hobbes believed that human nature was always power hungry and cannot
be satisfied with little power. Humans always craved for more power which satisfied them
(Hobbes). The gain of power creates more desire, the desire for glory, luxurious life and
recognition from others. Hobbes believed that man by nature was solitary, nasty, brutal, and
poor and savage who craved for power for a better life and in the process can do anything to
achieve that.

2STATE OF HUMAN NATURE
However, in this context Rousseau held a different view of human nature. Rousseau
believed that human nature was shaped by the nature of the society in which it survived.
Before human nature comes in contact with the society and is shaped by it, it possesses two
natural feelings or sentiments. The first one is amour de soi which means love for oneself,
and the other is pitie which means sympathy or pity (Rousseau). The first sentiment of self-
love can be seen as the quality which develops self-respect or honour in a person. However, if
exposed to negative atmosphere, the self-love turns into false ideas such as pride. The self-
preservation is an aspect of the self-love which focuses on the development of the self
without being harmed. The second feeling, which is pity, is the natural sympathy that man
has in him as the desire of not harming others. So it can be seen according to Rousseau’s
belief human nature is by default pure and has sympathy for others. However, circumstances
and the society can bring in negative changes in the human nature.
John Locke however, presents a different idea from the other two philosophers.
Locke’s views looks upon human nature as rational and equal that possess the ability to do
whatever they want. Human nature is neither good nor bad but has a rational outlook towards
the laws of nature. According to Locke, the laws of nature are the universal laws and every
human should abide by these laws (Gorman). It depends on the person’s will whether to abide
by the law or not. It is not the inner evil or inner goodness which makes the human take a
decision, but the rationality present in human nature which makes the person take a decision
to do good or evil. Hence, a person is responsible for his own actions and should be
accordingly rewarded or punished based on the outcome of his actions in response to the laws
of nature. It can be either good or evil.
The discussion of human nature further investigates into the nature of human
relationships. Hobbes believed that human beings by nature interacted with each other for
self-benefits. He was of the idea that if a certain desire is similar for two persons the