Comparing Mencius, Hs�n Tzu, And Thomas Hobbes

As the topic of human nature became more significant, there were many debates of what the definition of human nature was. Although it is hard to tell what the correct answer to that is, there were any theories that were brought forward to keep the thought going. Four of the most famous philosophers for their ideas on human nature include: Mencius, Hsün Tzu, John Locke, and Thomas Hobbes. Mencius believed that human nature was inherently good. Through his writing, Mencius tends to use metaphors to get his point across, some of which were very hard to understand. One that he uses to explain his theories is, “Human nature is inherently good, just like water flows inherently downhill” (Mencius 79). He makes it seem as if it is obvious that human nature is good by the way he states how water flows downhill. He also states, “You can make them evil, but that says nothing about human nature” (Mencius 79). Even though some points were made effectively, his writing style and overuse of metaphors that no one understands made his argument weak. Overall, Mencius truly believed that the human nature of man was inherently good. Hsün Tzu believed that the human nature of man is evil. At the end of almost every paragraph of Tzu’s essay style writing ends in "It is obvious from this, then, that the nature of man is evil” (Tzu 86). This

One of Locke’s largest points is "All ideas come from sensation or reflection” (Locke 101). He thinks that man is completely blank when they are born and that their basic senses are what gives them knowledge. Locke states, “Let us then suppose the mind to be, as we say, white paper” (Locke 101). Locke is basically saying that human nature is like a blank slate, and how men experience life in their own ways is what makes them good or evil. Overall, Locke believes that any and all knowledge is only gained through life