Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau Essay -- Philosophy Philosophi

Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau developed theories on kind constitution and how work force g all overn themselves. With the passing of time, political views on the philosophy of presidential term gradually changed. Despite their differences, Hobbes and Rousseau, both became two of the most important political theorists in the world. Their fancys and philosophies spread all over the world influencing the invention of many new governments. These theorists all recognize that raft develop a social contract within their hunting lodge, but have differing views on what just the social contract is and how it is established. By way of the differing versions of the social contract Hobbes and Rousseau concur that certain freedoms had been surrendered for a societys protection and emphasizing the governments definite responsibilities to its citizens. Each political theorist agrees that before men came to govern themselves, they all exis ted in a carry of temperament. The state of nature is the condition men were in before political government came into existence, and what society would be if there was no government. In relation to this the two theorists embossed as much praise as criticism for their famous masterpieces. Hobbes and Rousseau created a revolutionary idea of the state of nature. They did not believe government should be create through the church, therefore abandoning the idea of the divine right scheme, where military unit of the king came directly from God. Starting from a clean slate, with no organized church, Hobbes and Rousseau needed a construct on what to build society on. The knowledgeableness of society began with the lord state of nature. Hobbes perception of the original state of nature is what would exist if there were no common power to execute and use the laws to restrain individuals. In this case, the laws of the jungle would prevail only the fittest survive. Mans desires are in satiable. Since resources are scarce, humankind is naturally competitive, inevitably creating jealousy and hatred, which in conclusion leads to war.The constant state of war is what Hobbes believes to be mans original state of nature. According to Hobbes, man cannot be trusted in the state of nature. War among men is consequent and nothing can be unjust. Notions of justice and injustice or right and wrong will not hav... ...ons on what kind of government should prevail within a society in order for it to function properly. Each dismissed the divine right theory and needed to start from a clean slate. The two authors agree that before men came to govern themselves, they all existed in a state of nature, which lacked society and structure. In addition, the two political philosophers developed differing versions of the social contract. In Hobbes system, the people did little more than choose who would have absolute rule over them. This is a system that can only be derived from a se t up where no system exists at all. It is the lesser of two evils. People to a lower place this state have no participation in the decision devising process, only to obey what is decided. While not perfect, the Rousseau state allows for the people under the state to participate in the decision making process. Rousseaus idea of government is more of a utopian idea and not truly executable in the real world. Neither state, however, describes what a government or sovereign should expect from its citizens or members, but both agree on the notion that certain freedoms must be surrendered in order to change the way of life for all humankind.