Comparing Thomas Hobbes And Jean Jacques Rousseau

Thomas Hobbes was a English philosopher. He believed that all humans are egotistical and selfish. He believed that society had to be controlled by a strong form of government. The controlling government would come in the form of an absolute monarchy. Hobbes developed the idea of a social contract. In the social contract, a person’s moral and political obligations are dependent on an agreement among them to form the society where they live. In return of society’s obligations, the absolute monarch would ensure law and order. Each end of the social contract were expected to follow their agreement in order for peace and control in their environments. John Locke had a more positive view of human nature. Unlike Thomas Hobbes who believed humans were self-absorbed and seeked for their own benefits, John Locke believed that humans could improve themselves if they were willing to. He believed humans had a natural ability to improve themselves

In 1762, Rousseau authored The Social Contract. However, his views were not similar to Hobbes. Hobbes’ social contract dealt in a contract with a society and its government, while Rousseau believed in the right for people to create their own government – a great difference from Hobbes’s views. Thomas Hobbes spoke on the idea of society without governments: “war … of every man against every man.”, and that society would be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” Similar to Locke, Rousseau believed a government will always manifest power given to them by their people, so the consent of society should be regarded by the government. Unlike the philosophes mentioned before, Rousseau believed there should be no titles of nobility. His reasoning for wanting to abolish noble titles stemmed from his belief that all people are equal. The only admirable government was one completely formed by the society according to Rousseau. In a simpler meaning – he believed in a direct