According to Thomas Hobbes, in the state of nature every person had complete liberty. He proposed that the pure state of nature is the natural condition of mankind.
According to Thomas Hobbes, the state of nature or life would be worthless if not protected by the state, while according to Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the state of nature involves men driving towards self-preservation.
Hobbes states that government is essential because it pulls society away from the natural state. Locke disagrees with Hobbesetc.~221BAB
its either 1. a monarch has absolute power 2. the state of nature is a peaceful and harmonious 3. political authority should be shared by the monarch and representatives of the people 4. citizens have a right to revolt. not sure which one of those 4 though.
strong nations....
He thought it shouldn't be Open to the church
Thomas Hobbes was an English philosopher known for his work in political philosophy. He is best known for his book "Leviathan," where he argued for a strong and centralized government to prevent the state of nature, which he believed was a state of war and chaos. Hobbes's theory influenced modern political thought and laid the foundation for social contract theory.
Hobbes main idea was human being need government to control them
Some notable political philosophers who have contributed to the field of political science include Aristotle, Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and Karl Marx. These thinkers have provided influential perspectives on topics such as political authority, justice, democracy, and the role of the state in society.
Thomas Hobbes was an influential philosopher known for his work on political theory, particularly his idea of the social contract and the Leviathan as a metaphor for the state. His most famous work, "Leviathan," laid the foundation for modern political thought and influenced subsequent philosophers like John Locke and Rousseau. Hobbes's ideas on sovereignty and the role of government continue to be studied and debated in political philosophy.
There have been many answers to this question, and they differ by philosopher. A good starting point might be to read Locke or Hobbes on the 'State of Nature,' or in Hobbes' case, the 'State of Warre'. This will necessarily lead to more current explorations, but in terms of political science, this is essentially the original argument.
Thomas Hobbes' main idea was that individuals in a state of nature are naturally self-interested and prone to conflict. He believed that a powerful government, or Leviathan, was necessary to maintain order and prevent chaos in society. Hobbes' social contract theory laid the foundation for modern political philosophy.
Thomas Hobbes contributed to the Enlightenment by his writings on political philosophy, particularly his work "Leviathan" which explored the social contract theory and the importance of a strong central government to maintain social order. He also laid the groundwork for modern political thought by emphasizing the need for a sovereign ruler to prevent the natural state of human conflict.
Silver State Legacy was created in 2011.
Thomas Hobbes was a 17th-century philosopher known for his work on political theory and social contract. He believed that humans are inherently self-interested and in a constant state of competition. Hobbes argued for a powerful central authority to maintain order and prevent conflict, as seen in his most famous work, Leviathan.
Both Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau were social contract theorists who believed that individuals give up certain freedoms to the state in exchange for protection and security. Additionally, they both discussed the concept of the state of nature to explain the origins of social and political institutions.
Thomas Hobbes was important because he was a key figure in political philosophy and his work laid the foundation for modern social contract theory. His book "Leviathan" was influential in shaping thinking about the nature of government and society. Hobbes is known for his idea of the state of nature, where life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short without the presence of a strong central authority.