PHILOSOPHY Assignment: Hobbes' and Locke's Views on Social Contract

This essay delves into the contrasting social contract theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, two prominent philosophers. It examines their differing perspectives on the state of nature, human behavior, and the role of government in ensuring political stability. The essay highlights Hobbes's view of a powerful sovereign as essential for maintaining order, contrasting it with Locke's emphasis on individual rights and limited government. It explores how their views on human self-interest and the potential for conflict shaped their respective social contract theories, ultimately offering insights into their historical significance and ongoing relevance within the field of political philosophy. The essay also references key texts such as Hobbes's Leviathan and Locke's Two Treatises of Government to support its arguments.

Running head: PHILOSOPHY 1
Philosophy
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Date of Submission

PHILOSOPHY 2
What Would Hobbes Say About Locke's Social Contract?
There are many things that Hobbes and Locke including a vision regarding social
contract. According to both of them, the social contract is recognizable as a tool towards
ensuring political stability. On the other hand, the two philosophers have entirely different
perspectives in line with their visions of human nature. Concerning such matters, this essay
activity will explore the historical significance of Hobbes’ philosophical outbursts on the
divergent social contractual theory against Locke’s perspectives on the same matter. However,
succinate discussions will highlight the perspectives of the two philosophers on nature’s state
(Locke, sect. 9).
First, there is no notion in the philosophical sphere that is as simple as that of the social
contract. It could also be considered as one of the most important Western philosophical
paradigms in line with shaping how individuals perceive social and justice structures.
Technically, the most prominent philosophers of the 17th century, John Locke and Thomas
Hobbes shared many ideas on the same. On the contrary, they also differed a lot. However, they
are still considered as the most significant social contract theory philosophers and proponents.
Regarding the two philosophers against each other, I could argue that Locke attained his
philosophical maturity in years that were more settled. Such was a time when the English Civil
War had subsided. He was then associated with political Whigs that struggled to attain limited
monarchy (Locke, sect. 128). By such sort of reasoning, if it could be acceptable that one agrees
to the fact that Hobbes’ aim, in line with his social contract theory, was to create favorable
conditions for a sovereign that is all-powerful, Locke’s argument, in turn, would be antipodean.
Most definitely, the argument behind such a case is tight to the fact that Locke was involved in
attempting to prevent James from succeeding his brother, Charles II. However, the standpoint of

PHILOSOPHY 3
Hobbes cannot be as skeptical as that of Locke. Hobbes never emphasized the inherent virtue of
humans such a move was calculated compared to Locke’s (Hobbes, 1651, pg. 7).
Second, as he began his theory, Hobbes purported that individuals in nature’s original
state are most significantly, interested in ensuring that their life is well preserved and not caring
if that would mean having another individual’s life destroyed in the process. As Hobbes says,
such a proliferation of self-interestedness creates universal war or a state of persistent conflict
between individuals. Hobbes continues to say that that the self-interestedness of human beings is
the reason why people seek violence while he in-turn, goes for peace and freedom (Locke, sect.
131). The idea is that peace and liberty are the only two areas from which individuals can pursue
pleasures. The statement then leads to the initial step that Hobbes took towards arguing out his
theory. The only way that war will be avoided is by having individuals entering into peace
treaties with everyone else. The main idea is peace. On the contrary, such an agreement cannot
be sufficient in ensuring that order gets maintained. Therefore, complying with such a social
contract would require attaining coercive power that would only be provided by a force that is
sovereign (Hobbes, 1651, pg. 7).

PHILOSOPHY 4
Reference
Hobbes, T. (1651). Leviathan. Leviathan Or The Matter, Forme, & Power Of A Common-Wealth
Ecclesiastical And Civil. Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, Churchyard, 1651.
Locke, I. (n.d) Two Treatises of Government. SALUS POPULI SUPREMA LEX ESTO
LONDON PRINTED MDCLXXXVIII. Chapters II-V.
Locke, I. (n.d) Two Treatises of Government. SALUS POPULI SUPREMA LEX ESTO
LONDON PRINTED MDCLXXXVIII. Chapters IX-XII.