John Locke and Thomas Hobbes are celebrated enlightenment thinkers whose works significantly influenced modern political thought development. Both philosophers created similar but somewhat different ideas about the concept of human nature.
Locke’s philosophy on human nature was a reaction to Hobbes’ viewpoint. Locke acknowledged humans for their independence and productivity. He believed that social ills such as theft, murder, rape, etc. are the outcomes of mixed-design social structures that force individuals out of their ‘natural’ state of independence and productivity. Hence, Locke believed in a loose democratic liberal administration grounded on the negotiation that Locke perceived as humankind’s natural state. Locke’s view on human nature underlines his belief that human nature allowed individuals to be selfish. Apparently, this view came to light with the introduction of currency. Locke asserted that all people, in a natural state, are equal and independent, and everyone owns the natural right of defending their life, possessions, liberty, and wellbeing.
Hobbes’ philosophy, contrary to Locke’s viewpoint, held that selfishness and violence were core human traits. He believed that humans in a natural state relied on brutality to get what they wanted. Due to this view, many perceived Hobbes as a monarchial apologist, while others held that this perception was unfair and misleading. According to the latter’s opinion, Hobbes would have waned a state that would control the brutish tendencies of the societal elite, just like the rest of the citizens.
Despite holding different viewpoints regarding the concept of human nature, Hobbes’ and Locke’s philosophies highlighted particular similarities. A commonality depicted by both thinkers is that a government was necessary. Again, this belief was contrasted by the means of recourse that the citizens of a particular government have when the administration abuses their rights. While Hobbes held a materialist and skeptical view of human nature, he focused on several topics that were similar to Locke’s concepts in the Leviathan. According to Vaughn, Hobbes often overlooked sections on language – which is similar to Locke’s work (CITE). Also, similar to Hobbes’ assertion, Locke believed that the sole right to defend the state of nature was insufficient. As a result, individuals formed civil societies to resolve conflicts civilly with government assistance in a community or state.
Although Locke’s and Hobbes’ assertions about human nature and the need for government were in agreement, the philosophers held radically different viewpoints about people’s ability to govern themselves.
Contrary to Hobbes’ stance, Locke believed that reason and tolerance characterize human nature.
Personally, Locke’s view, compared to Hobbes’ viewpoint, seems more accurate. Looking at human interactions within society, it is easy to see why individuals should have natural rights; leaders should derive their authority from the consent of the electorate; the electorate ought to have the right to overthrow administrations that abused their rights. Many regard Locke as the honorary founding father of the U.S. His ideas formed the basis of the nation’s Independence Declaration. Thus, Locke’s contribution justifies ranking him amongst the greatest thinkers and one whose work accurately portray how a typical government should be, and the need to resist tyrannical administration.