GPHC 2019-2020

What do the political philosophers Locke, Rousseau, and Hobbes have to say about why people form government?  What do they say about sovereignty, power, legitimacy, and interdependence? Do you agree with their theories?  How would YOU establish government? Locke believed in the idea of a social contract. He formed his political ideas based on the contract. He believed that human nature is human nature is characterised by reason and tolerance. He also believed that revolution is not only a right but an obligation in some circumstances. He believed that human nature allowed us (people) to be selfish. He believed that no matter where you come from or who you come from you are born of a clean slate. He believed that from the point of birth forward, everyone is equal and independent and everyone had a natural right to defend their life, health, liberty, and possessions. We can assume that we get the idea of "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" that is found in the De

Locke, Rousseau, and Hobbes are certainly some of the most influential thinkers in human history, especially upon the tradition of liberalism which we in the United States have inherited. Perhaps the most important distinction between the three is in their respective views of humanity in its state of nature. Locke and Rousseau tended to have a more positive view of this situation, believing that the natural tendency of humans is to respect each other's freedoms and to coexist. Hobbes, on the other hands, believed that nature is a state of war, starvation, and betrayal, necessitating the creation of the state. The question of human nature, in my view, is what ultimately guides our vision for society. I will decline to speculate on the details of humanity in its natural state, because I believe that the very idea of humanity in a state of nature is arbitrary. In no period of human history have we existed in the absence of society; "organized" or otherwise, humans are hard

Rousseau claims that the main reason people create governments is in order to form bodies that allow them to make more just decisions while simultaneously having the power to make them in the first place. Rousseau is very democratic, down to his core, he believed in a direct democracy in which everyone voted to express the general will and to make the laws of the land. Rousseau had in mind a democracy on a small scale in particular, perhaps one similar to his native home of Geneva? The government also serves a double purpose as a method to house a protective ring of individuals that would not allow those within the ring to get hurt. Basically it was a self preservation method as much as it was a law and order necessity. Should I run the government, first off I'd feel very bad for whatever poor schmucks I'm ruling over because whoever chose me or birthed me to be next in line did not make a very good decision putting me in charge. Despite that, I would lean towards a democracy,

I think Locke, Rousseau, and Hobbes would each agree that people form government to establish order amongst people. However, their theories on what characteristics drive mankind to do such actions that might need to be governed by law and what the most effective way to manage society varies. Locke and Rousseau share a more similar perspective in the sense that they believe in a democracy where each individual has a say in the governing of the community. Rousseau believed laws are only effective when they are supported by the general will of the people. This creates a system of interdependence: he argues that because any attack on one member of the united body would affect the rest, people would develop the duty and common interest to support each other so they all grow stronger together. He claimed that it is impossible for a body to want to harm all of its members so consequently none are harmed. Locke believed that there was no need for the influence of a single sovereign since the n

Izabella Curtis Mr. Roddy GPHC 24 February 2020 Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau The True Dudes            Thomas Hobbes: English philosopher (1588-1679), Fun Fact! Hobbes was the name inspiration for the character in the famous comic book series Calvin and Hobbes. Hobbes was influenced by the English Civil War. He lived through it and that led him to believe even if government had a bad king that it would be better than to have a nasty revolution. That is how the philosophy "the state of nature" was created a time that is supposed to be before any king or government. His ideal government is where there is an absolute monarchy he believed that life is "nasty, bruitish, and short." and that people are jerks and that is why we need one king that holds all the power to set boundaries and rule. John Locke: English philosopher (1632-1704) Fun Fact! Locke was one of the first philosophers to not have a beard! (possibly not true but if you look through generations of

Charlie McGill Mr. Roddy Global Politics 2/24/2020 Political Philosophy and Foundation of Government The political philosophers Locke, Rousseau, and Hobbes are three of the most influential political thinkers ever, with the United States, much of Europe, and other countries around the world establishing government based on their principles. I will talk about what those principles are, but first the reason for government must be established. Each of these three political philosophers have different theories as to why government comes to be, but all of them stem from the state of nature. Hobbes asserts that government must be created to avoid the state of nature because it's comparable to a state of war. Locke believes government arises from the state of nature even though he sees it to be a place of peace and equality. Rousseau believes the state of nature to be a morally neutral and peaceful condition, which humans naturally leave when they become dependent on one another

Hobbes invented the idea of the social contract. He says that man is too greedy and too sus and a government must be formed in order to keep man from fighting. Government prevents chaos. The law keeps man’s power in check.  Locke believed in a government in which Men agree to it themselves but this means the government has to protect the rights of the individuals. The government is supposed to allow individuals freedom and liberty because then they will be safe from violence of others and laws are there to protect man’s rights and property.  Rousseau also looks at the government as a protection for man because man cant survive alone. The social contract makes them relate to each other and secures their independence and forces them to be free because you have other people holding you accountable.   Hobbes says the monarch has sovereignty.its better to lose individual rights than order. The ruler has the power to maintain the power. Locke says that the ruler and the citizens have

The part of what would my government be like got me excited, so here it goes. My government would be modeled very closely to Switzerland, as they are the #1 best-governed country in the world. One important factor they maintain is good checks and balances, which I would transfer over into my government style. As well as that, Denmark has a well regulated electoral process, so I would incorporate that as well, because who doesn't want a fair voting process. As well as that, using the post oak school as an example, I would change community meetings in the sense that there is one elected person to do all the meetings, like a "president". Moving away from this, Hobbes's opinion on Government was that all persons are naturally equal, and people can do whatever they needed to do to live.   As well as that, it was up to the individual to complete the supreme power. Both locke and Hobbs agree there should be an official document imposing peace, but Locke things the rights of

Jack Gross Rousseau said that people form government in order to create groups in which the members have more power to make decisions. Rousseau says that when people come together to form government bodies they mutually assure each others protection, this is shown in "As soon as this multitude is thus united in a body, one cannot harm one of the members without attacking the whole body. It is even less possible that the body can be harmed without the members feeling it." He also talks about how when people with mutual interests come together they can work to each others benefit, this is shown in. "Thus duty and interest equally obligate the two contracting parties to come to one another's aid, and the same men should seek to combine in this twofold relationship all the advantages that result from it." Rousseau talks about how working together is to the benefit of all those included in the sovereign and I would have to agree with him. As Rousseau said, whenever

The theories of Locke, Hobbes, and Rousseau are all central to the political thought of the Western world during the Age of Enlightenment, and have had a profound impact on the politics of today, most notably, probably, through the democratization of Western Europe and the United States. In fact, the United States was founded upon many of the principles expressed by these theorists. In terms of Rousseau's theories, the United States represents the transition between the anarchic state fundamental to human nature and the civilized, egalitarian representation that contributes to the general welfare of society. In terms of Locke's theories, human nature is inherently good and logical, which is why the human nature of general society drives so much of the decisions made in America. This contrasts with Hobbes, who views human nature as a threat to the survival of the individual and something that should thus be centralized and civilized. My hypothetical government would take all o

I tend to arrange these thinkers in order of how depressing their social ideas were. First, Rousseau, the most cheery of the bunch. He believed that the state of nature was compassionate and that government corrupted that natural state, and so government should be small and serve the people. People were the foundation of his ideal society, their government only ensuring the minimum necessary for functional society while the individuals that comprised it acted in the group's interest. Locke was the more centrist of the two, believing in stronger government that countered itself and checked its own power. His ideal was where government was where the people were subject to the government, but the government was still dictated by the people. Hobbes was in favor of a large, powerful government to counter humanity's brutal state of nature. The leader's power should be directly tied to the well-being of the people, and as such, the leader would make decisions that benefit the peop

Hobbes: Hobbes believes that the "state of nature" was that everyone was created equal. However, because of this he believes that the people must put their equality aside and allow for there to be one higher power. This higher power being a monarchy was was Hobbes believed to be the best option because a King would have more purposeful and consistent rule. Locke: Locke agree with Hobbes that to ensure peace in a society you must follow the social contract. However, Locke disagree with Hobbes in two other major ways. Locke believed that life, liberty, and property were inalienable rights that could not be given away or taken. He also disagreed that the King would have absolute power because the individual rights of humans would not allow for him to have complete power. Instead, his role would be more to enforce and protect laws. Because of this, Locke favored a representative government. However, he believed only adult male property owners were fit to vote in the government.

Philosophers and Government  Locke, Rousseau, and Hobbes all have different views on why people form governments as well as power, sovereignty, legitimacy, and interdependence.  Locke believed that people form a government because they want to preserve their property. To quote Locke specifically: "The great chief and end, therefore, of men uniting into commonwealths, and putting themselves under government, is the preservation of their property..." (Locke 2). As far as sovereignty goes, Locke believed that the government has the power to execute the "State of Nature", which I assume is the law, to punish criminals in a way that is relative to and appropriate for the crime that they committed. Locke also says that the law would be pointless if the government wasn't allowed to execute it to quote "preserve the innocent and restrain the offenders" (Locke 1). Before telling us what the government and the common person can use the law for, he tells us

Sarah Laskin Feb 24, 2020 John Locke believes the people have unalienable rights such as life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. He also believes in the social contract theory, which states that people choose to give power to a ruler and if the ruler is bad, they can take that power away and rebel. He says the natural state of nature of people is chaotic but not necessarily good or bad, and people have stronger moral limits. Government is necessary to subdue the chaos. He also believes the law of nature can be discovered by reason alone, and it is different than divine law. Lastly, he believes all people have natural rights which are privileges or claims to which people are entitled. Thomas Hobbes believes the world without government is a violent place where people live in constant fear, similar to a state of war (but not necessarily with the fighting). He believes people are nasty, solitary, and live short lives without the government. He believes men are equal in natu

If I were to create a government, it would be consisted of equal amounts of men and women. It would be a government that had a president instead of a king or queen. The government would be modeled after the US government because that seems the most fair with the three branches that have to agree on things. Even though my government would be modeled after the US government, I would not give all the power to the president. The President would be there to supervise rather then boss around the other branches. There would be citizen elections every few years for the senate and house, and the mayors of the states would come to be in the senate while the house would be off three people from each state; one man, one woman, and one person of another gender would be elected. There would be no set religion for the country and people would be free to choose their own religion and jobs. For the military, there would be an army, a navy, and an air force so that those who go into the military can cho

The excerpts we read by Locke, Hobbes, and Rosseau, all grapple centrally with the issue of how naturally free but unsafe humans might go about trading off their natural state for a safer but less free society. Locke and Hobbes offer opposing views on how this ought to be dealt with, while Rosseau works to clearly outline the problem without getting into specifics of solutions. Rosseau's essay points out that for free humans to form a society that is in line with their own freedom, it must be one where everyone acts in the best interest of the whole and looks out to stop anyone who's trying to benefit themselves at the cost of the whole. The questions of how the best interest of the whole is determined or how to assure it is acted in are not delved into in Rosseau's essay, but they are what Hobbes and Locke discuss. The conundrum both acknowledge is that although, as Rosseau points out, in the long run it is in the best interest of individuals to act in the best interests

John Mazziotti Mr. Roddy GPHC February 23rd, 2020 Political Philosophy and Foundation of Government Blog Locke, Rousseau, and Hobbes are 3 political philosophers with their own views of what the “ideal” government should be like. John Locke remarks on the way that his ideal government ensures comfortable lives, stability throughout the people’s relationship with the government, and protection of the people’s rights. Rousseau had a similar belief of equality as Locke;  between mankind in his ideal government. Rousseau remarks on how the will of the people is greater than the will of the government, and that the people control the laws of the land with a voting system. He talks about how security, justice, liberty, and property, should be distributed throughout the population of the people. While both Rousseau and Locke discuss their views with their main system’s involving a branch of Democracy, Thomas Hobbes prefers an Absolute Monarchy. He believes that humans alone witho

Locke, Rousseau, and Hobbes have some varying opinions about how they approach concepts around political philosophy. This makes sense, given they lived in different areas and were prevalent around some different times, however, many of their opinions and theories heavily overlap and build on each other quite a bit. First of all, they all build their theories off of the idea that generally, all men are created equal. This establishes already the idea that no singular person is wholly entitled to the total sovereignty or control of the people by just being there. It establishes that since there is no predetermined or divinely decided hierarchy, there need to be an agreement on the sides of both the sovereign and the ruled. This establishes that if there is to be a power, it needs to be one with legitimacy, built on interdependence with the people being ruled. However, if there isn't a predestined person or persons entitled to authority, then what is the necessity of a sovereign power

What do the political philosophers Locke, Rousseau, and Hobbes have to say about why people form government?  What do they say about sovereignty, power, legitimacy, and interdependence?  Do you agree with their theories?  How would YOU establish government? Hobes believed that power was neseccary which is something that I believe in. Without rules and structure in our lives, what are we left with? Some form of anarchy that, in my opinion, would never be beneficial. I am a firm believer in routine, and I think part of having a form of government bleeds into my daily routines. In the car on my way to school I listen to Up First by NPR, which often discusses government. The government, and my taxes, keep my roads clear, and they are the ones to pick up the recycling that I take out to the curb. Without government I wouldn't have to go to school, which is a central part of my life. I would establish government with a view similar to Hobes, that without rules humans are thrown into

The philosophical theories of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau played an instrumental role in the creation of the US government. Hobbes believed that the best form of government would be an absolute monarchy with a king who would make all of the decisions on behalf of the kingdom no matter what. Although this belief is not in line with the US government, Hobbes’ belief that the king should do all he can to reign fairly (this is the social contract) is a value that many Americans have. Locke provided much more concrete ideas and language than Hobbes that are present in some of America’s oldest documents. Locke believed that all people were created equal and had the right to “life, liberty, and property.” This language is similar to the right to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” found in the US Declaration of Independence. Locke’s philosophy stated that if the government failed to uphold the social contract, the citizens had the right to revolt. Rousseau was much more pro total d

Hobbes and Locke have many similar ideas, specifically regarding free will. Both think that all humans are equal, and that free will caused chaos and disorder in nature. Hobbes believed that in nature, there aren't any laws so humans had to create government to maintain order. Locke believes that government was created as a part of the social contract theory, where every human strives for "life, liberty, and the pursuit of property". However, their beliefs differ when it come to the system of government. Hobbes was a big believer in the divine right of kings, and that god was the ultimate ruler over all. Locke on the other hand was more secular, and did not believe in divine right. In fact, he said that if a leader lost the support of a society, that they should be able to remove him. If you look at the United States constitution, you can clearly see many connections to John Locke's philosophies, such representative government, freedom of religion, and life, liberty,

Q: What do the political philosophers Locke, Rousseau, and Hobbes have to say about why people form government?  What do they say about sovereignty, power, legitimacy, and interdependence?  Do you agree with their theories?  How would YOU establish government? Locke:   Locke agreed with Hobbes that human nature allowed people to be selfish, however he disagreed with Hobbes two major points. Locke believed that life, liberty, and property is something that should never be taken away by anyone. He believed that those rights were “inalienable.” Locke believe that property was the most important right. He said that government was mainly necessary to show “public good.” Locke also believed that Hobbes social contract was not just an agreement among the people but between the people and the sovereign/king. Locke’s Two Treaties of Government, was used in the Declaration of Independence. Overall, Locke believe that the natural rights of individuals Restricted the power of the king. The king

Callista Wilson Mr. Roddy Global Politics and Historical Contexts 22 February 2020 Perhaps people develop governments for a wide number or reasons; however political philosophers John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Thomas Hobbes had their own interpretations. Locke believed that people should live by a social contract between each other and with the government, and that people and leaders are innately interdependent. This is plausible because governments ultimately rely on taxes and corporation from their people to effectively operate, and individuals may need the government to support their education, healthcare, safety, infrastructure, or human rights. Additionally, Rousseau believed that nations could be truly sovereign when governments allowed each person to have freedom and sovereignty over themselves. Meaning that governments should be representative, so that the voices of people are taken into account.  Although Rousseau and Locke seemed to agr