...Dreze Griffin Humans in a State of Nature Without an overarching authority, the comfortable life we know today would not be possible. The purpose of government is to protect property rights and to provide for security of its people. In a state of anarchy, this protection and security would be non-existent. This would cause humans to have to provide their own security and protect their own property. The debate on how humans would act under these circumstances was greatly examined by 17th centuries philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, and 18th century philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Each philosopher has different views on how humans would behave in a state of nature. Thomas Hobbes in particular is the most accurate in his description of how humans would behave and interact with each other. Like Hobbes, I believe that humans are only out to maximize their self-interests and in a state of nature, they will do so by any means possible. In The Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes takes on a realist perspective as he describes how he believes humans will behave in a state of nature. He writes that in such circumstances, humans are only out to maximize their own self-interests (Leviathan, Shifdar). I also take this perspective believing that in a state of nature, the main goal of humans is to obtain and preserve power. Basing my beliefs after Hobbes, I believe that to obtain such power, humans will attempt to do so by any means. In a state of nature, the most common way people will...
Words: 1078 - Pages: 5
...The view of human nature and the role of the state: Human nature is difficult to define but can be summed up as the innate characteristics and traits that all human beings are born with, which is free from culture influence. What these characteristics and traits are, is often cause for debate as it is a general belief that these should apply to everyone. However the problem lies in the fact that no two humans are the same therefore reaching a unanimous decision on what human nature is, is near enough impossible. Over the years three ideologies have emerged as the leading theories on human nature; conservatism, classical liberalism and Marxism. The three have their own differing views on what the basis of human nature is. These ideologies have evolved into political parties and their policies are largely influenced by their views on human nature. This essay will look into the three ideologies, their beliefs on human nature and how this affects their view on the role of the state. The state is a sovereign entity within a clearly defined region which has monopoly of violence, thus holding the ability to create peace or war. Views on the state, in terms of its function and involvement in society, stems largely from ones ideas on human nature. The conservative view on human nature is quite pessimistic. Conservatism is largely based around the theories of Thomas Hobbes who developed these theories around the time of a civil war in the 17th century. This could possibly explain...
Words: 742 - Pages: 3
...Sample Exam Question: Why does Hobbes describe the state of nature as a state of war? Before answering the question why Hobbes describes the state of nature as a state of war it is to be clarified what is meant by those two terms. For Hobbes, as pictured in his work “Leviathan”, the “state of nature” is the condition before the foundation of the state. In this condition of anarchy, literally everybody has the freedom to do everything he wants. The state of nature is also a “condition of war a war of every one against every one” (p. 189). For Hobbes, “war” is not only the situation of actual battle, but also the immediate thread that a battle might occur (p. 186). Analyzing Hobbes’ argumentation, one can find three main reasons why the state of nature is a state of war: 1. Men are motivated to use force, 2. Literally every man is able to do so, 3. Nobody hinders them therein. As for the motivation, Hobbes identifies three main reasons to use force (p. 185): The first is “competition” to gain something that belongs to someone else – such as his wife, cattle, land, etc. The second reason is “diffidence”, or the will to violently defend something from a competitor. The third cause of quarrel is “glory”: men seek reputation and therefore fight over even the most insignificant things, such as words, a smile, etc. The second condition why Hobbes identifies the state of nature as a state of war is that men are always able to use force as a means of resolving conflict...
Words: 590 - Pages: 3
...Introduction to International Law Does Taiwan qualify as a state under International law? Apply the factual criteria to this and elaborate on the role of recognition by other states. What does this case study contribute to the debate around the nature of International law? ------------------------------------------------- Lecturer: Natalie ------------------------------------------------- Author: Rofhiwa Ramahala ------------------------------------------------- Tutorial Group: 4 ------------------------------------------------- Due Date: 7th March 2016 Introduction Two separate statements made by two high profiled Chinese government officials in 1999 threw the question of Taiwan sovereignty into question. The first statement originated from then President of the government of the Republic of China (or “ROC”) Lee Teng-hui on Taiwan on July 10, 1999 during an interview with a reporter. In the interview he stated that the relationship between China and Taiwan is one of a “special state-to-state relationship”. While in the second statement a spokesperson of the People’s Republic of China (or “PRC”) after a severe earthquake struck Taiwan. The United Nation office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs attempted to send a disaster management team to Taiwan, however then Secretary General Kofi Annan was informed that the U.N. had to ask the government of the PRC for permission to dispatch an aid team to Taiwan. Mr. Annan thus coined the statement of “the Taiwan Province of...
Words: 3345 - Pages: 14
...Thomas Hobbes and John Locke Abstract The Social Contract theory which dominated the European political thought in the eighteen century has played a very important part in the development of the modern political theory and practice. Being the most important of all the speculative theories, it came into being as a result of reaction against the theory of the Divine Origin. This theory was the first to denounce the influence of the church in the state affairs, provided an explanation for the origin of the state and shows the relationship between those who governs and those who are governed. Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are the chief exponents of the Contract Theory. Both of them have established their thesis from the beginning of human habitation, though their ideas and opinions are quite distinct. Hobbes in his theory has only described one contract where Locke has described two. Thomas Hobbes’ “Leviathan” and John Locke’s “Two Treaties on Civil Government” these books are considered as bibles in the evolution of modern states system. Though there are criticisms and debates regarding the social contract theory, but the modern political theories today have evolved from these contract theories which has no doubt. The aim of this assignment is to compare and contrast between Thomas Hobbes and John Locke and explore their contribution in the development of international relations according to the analysis of their works. Introduction Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan and John Locke’s...
Words: 3749 - Pages: 15
...Contract Theory? The concept of social contract theory is that in the beginning man lived in the state of nature. They had no government and there was no law to regulate them. There were hardships and oppression on the sections of the society. To overcome from these hardships they entered into two agreements which are:1. “Pactum Unionis”; and 2. “Pactum Subjectionis”. By the first pact of unionis, people sought protection of their lives and property. As, a result of it a society was formed where people undertook to respect each other and live in peace and harmony. By the second pact of subjectionis, people united together and pledged to obey an authority and surrendered the whole or part of their freedom and rights to an authority. The authority guaranteed everyone protection of life, property and to a certain extent liberty. Thus, they must agree to establish society by collectively and reciprocally renouncing the rights they had against one another in the State of Nature and they must imbue some one person or assembly of persons with the authority and power to enforce the initial contract. In other words, to ensure their escape from the State of Nature, they must both agree to live together under common laws, and create an enforcement mechanism for the social contract and the laws that constitute it. Thus, the authority or the government or the sovereign or the state came into being because of the two agreements. Analysis of the theory of Social Contract by...
Words: 2472 - Pages: 10
...one another and established the first sovereign states. For both theorists the period before the institution of a social contract, what they call the "state of nature", is important in understanding what form this first government took and what rights or liberties it was meant to protect. The state of nature is a time in which primitive humans roamed the earth without regard for what we now consider laws or social customs. While not a scientific study of social or biological evolution by any means, in fact both Hobbes and Rousseau admit the State of Nature may very well have never existed, it is an important concept of abstract political theory that enables us to debate the role human nature plays in the formation of governments and how these governments can better serve the people who institute them. Hobbes describes our natural state, in his treatise Leviathan, as one of equality. By this he does not mean moral or social equality, he is referring only to physical equality. He says, "Nature hath made men so equal, in the faculties of body, and mind."(Hobbes 68) He adds that on occasion one may be stronger or smarter than another, however, "when all is reckoned together, the difference between man, and man, is not as considerable as that one man can thereupon claim to himself any benefit, to which another may not pretend, as well as him."(Hobbes 68) What he means by this is that no one is safe from anyone else in the state of nature. Even if one is weaker than another, the weak...
Words: 2642 - Pages: 11
...The pure state of nature or "the natural condition of mankind" was deduced by the 17th century English philosopher Thomas Hobbes, in Leviathan. Hobbes argued that all humans are by nature equal in faculties of body and mind. From this equality and other causes in human nature, everyone is naturally willing to fight one another: so that "during the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man". In this state every person has a natural right or liberty to do anything one thinks necessary for preserving one's own life; and life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" (Leviathan, Chapters XIII-XIV). In short Hobbes believes is self-preservation, even if something was someonelse's, if you felt the need for it you had the right to fight for it and claim it as your own. Hobbes described this natural condition with the Latin phrase bellum omnium contra omnes (meaning war of all against all), in his work De Cive. Within the state of nature there is neither private property nor injustice since there is no law, except for certain natural precepts discovered by reason ("laws of nature"): the first of which is "that every man ought to endeavor peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it" (Leviathan, Ch. XIV); and the second is "that a man be willing, when others are so too, as far forth as for peace and defense of himself he shall think it necessary, to lay down this...
Words: 1452 - Pages: 6
...means, in effect, majority rule. Locke was also deeply concerned with maintaining the rights of the people, especially the right to own property. Locke's political view produces a much more democratic system, while Hobbes' produces a much more authoritarian, if not totalitarian, system. Both Locke and Hobbes start their political analysis with reference to the state of nature. However, their definitions of this state of nature stand in stark contrast to one another. The differences on their perception of the state of nature correspond to the final conclusions of what is important in a civil society. The contrasting perceptions of the state of nature on the part of these two philosophers are crucial, because they use those perceptions as the foundations for the political philosophies which they then construct. The only thing Hobbes agrees with in Locke's teaching of the state of nature is that the state of war must be avoided at all costs. Locke's more democratic political philosophy flows from his belief in man's ability to reason, and his right to own property, even in a state of nature. To Hobbes, the state of nature is one in which every...
Words: 1828 - Pages: 8
...approach. Decision theory is an analytic and systematic approach to the study of decision making The Six Steps in Decision Making 1. Clearly define the problem at hand 2. List the possible alternatives 3. Identify the possible outcomes or states of nature 4. List the payoff or profit of each combination of alternatives and outcomes 5. Select one of the mathematical decision theory models 6. Apply the model and make your decision 1 Thompson Lumber Company Step 1 – Define the problem Expand by manufacturing and marketing a new product, backyard storage sheds Step 2 – List alternatives Construct a large new plant A small plant No plant at all Step 3 – Identify possible outcomes The market could be favorable or unfavorable Possible outcomes are also called “States of Nature” Thompson Lumber Company Step 4 – List the payoffs Identify conditional values for the conditional large, small, and no plants for the two possible market conditions Payoffs or profits are called conditional values 2 Thompson Lumber Company Step 4 – List the payoffs conditional Identify conditional values for the large, small, and no plants for the two possible market conditions STATE OF NATURE FAVORABLE MARKET ($) UNFAVORABLE MARKET ($) Construct a large plant 200,000 Construct a small plant 100,000 -180,000 -20,000 ALTERNATIVE Do Nothing 0 0 Thompson Lumber Company Step 4 – List the payoffs Identify...
Words: 3369 - Pages: 14
...Hobbes versus Locke: State of Nature and Legitimacy By David Feinman In the study of political theory and the analysis of the role of the sovereign in western society, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are two of the most in fluential figures. Their philosophies on the way in which man lived before forming societies have be en the backbone of the discussion of the state of nature and the legitimacy of the sovereign for ma ny centuries. Hobbes, seeing the natural world as a nasty, brutish place of perpetual war, sees the legitim acy of a sovereign as being unquestioned and that of a paternal figure that instills order in a world without law or reason. Locke, in opposition, views the state of nature as a peaceful place where man can enjoy equa lity and liberty, and he believes that a sovereign’s legitimacy comes from the consent of the people whom he serves and protects, and who can remove him from power when he ceases to do so. This essay analy zes the differing opinions on the idea of a state of nature in Hobbes’ Leviathan and Locke’s The Second Treatise of Government , and how those views influenced their ideas on the legitimacy of the sovereign. In terms of the state of nature, Hobbes a nd Locke see two very different worlds. In Leviathan , Hobbes sees the state of nature as a perpetual state of war “where every man is Enemy to every man.” 1 Without “a common Power to keep them all in awe, th ey are in the condition wh ich is...
Words: 780 - Pages: 4
...and only focus on themselves. By elucidating both point of views we will then be able to decide for ourselves which one of these authors seems to be more right in defining what is politics. While reading Aristotle’s book Politics Aristotle firmly asserts that the city-state exists by nature. He writes: A complete community constituted out of several villages, once it reaches the limit of total self-sufficiency, practically speaking, is a city-state. It comes to be for the sake of living, but it remains in existence for the sake of living well. That is why every city-state exists by nature since the first communities do. (Page 3 Lines 26-30). Once a community fully becomes independent and does not require any outside help in satisfying their needs that is when a community becomes a city-state. Here we see Aristotle’s assertion that a “city-state exists by nature” come to fruition. Adaptation is a key in human evolution. “For the sake of living” A city-state becomes what it fully wants to become because it wants to be, and stays in existence “For the sake of living well” in order to adapt in becoming a full-fledged city-state. In other words a community becomes a city-state so it can escape the primitive nature of what a community simply is....
Words: 1118 - Pages: 5
...As a result of the lack of punishments for breaking both pre-existing societal rules and those set out by Ralph, (some) boys in Lord of the Flies degenerate into a State of Nature. Amongst various reasons for why the boys degenerate into a state of nature, the lack of real punishments the boys face for breaking both pre-existing societal rules and those set out by Ralph is the main factor. Amongst the various reasons as to why the boys degenerate into a State of Nature, the lack of real punishments is the main factor. Amongst the various reaonA lack of real punishments is the main factor as to why boys in Lord of The Flies degenerate into a State of Nature I LOVE SAMANTHA BTW Thomas Hobbes wrote in Leviathan about the atrocities and horrors of mankind if a time came where there was no government and laws to keep us in check. This anarchical situation was termed the State of Nature....
Words: 568 - Pages: 3
...|The Components of a Decision Problem | The three basic components of a decision problem are the decision alternatives; the possible environments, conditions, or states of nature within which a decision is to be implemented; and the outcomes or payoffs that will result from each possible combination of alternatives and states of nature. The decision alternatives are those actions from among which the decision maker must choose. That is, they are the aspects of the decision situation over which the decision maker has direct control. The states of nature are those aspects of the decision situation over which the decision maker does not have direct control. They certainly include things over which there is no control, such as the weather, the general state of the economy, or actions taken by the national government. They may also include things which can be influenced to some extent but not completely. The market response to a new product (which is partly determined by the price charged and advertising) or a competitor's actions (which may be at least partly determined by choices made by the decision maker) are conditions the decision maker cannot determine completely. Making a decision and implementing it within a state of nature will result in some outcome, which may be either a gain or a loss. The payoff function specifies what that outcome is for every...
Words: 5165 - Pages: 21
...Final What are mental states according to Behaviorism? The theory according to which mental states can be analyzed in terms of observable behavior or dispositions to engage in such behavior. Mental states are nothing but the cause of behavior and, therefore, we can identify them with physical states of the central nervous system. What is the role of dispositions in the account of mental states? They are statements about how a person will behave in various circumstances. If conditions are such-and-such, then the person will behave so-and-so.) Does the behaviorist deny that behavior is caused by the brain processes? Why brain processes do not constitute mental states? There is nothing more to mental states than how we are disposed to act. Behaviorists maintain that mental states are nothing more than dispositions to behave in certain ways! What is the inner aspect of mental states and why does it provide and argument against behaviorism? Why does it provide an argument against behaviorism? Epiphenomenalism is the view that mental events are caused by physical events in the brain, but have no effects upon any physical events. What is the interconnected character of mental states and how does it provide an argument against behaviorism? Every mental state is related to another mental state. It denies everything internally. For example pain, you need an Asprin to feel better. When you define one mental state, you must define another. Behaviorist don’t believe...
Words: 2235 - Pages: 9
