регистрация / вход

State Of Nature Essay Research Paper Robbie

СОДЕРЖАНИЕ: State Of Nature Essay, Research Paper Robbie Dagg 4/22/99 State of Nature To trigger off any philosophy on what should be the characteristics of the state we

State Of Nature Essay, Research Paper

Robbie Dagg


State of Nature



cannot trace back to any time that we?ve been without government, we must imagine what



differences in views for what the ?ideal? state should be and serve as.

A character of a state is described to best remedy for the deficiency of the ?State

of Nature?, as Hobbes came up with his pessimistic state of nature in which life is solitary,





leads to violence. ?where there are no restraints on people?s actions, it leads to the war of

?all against all?? says Hobbes. So, Hobbes is basically saying, any state is better than the





Hobbes with their own ideas of the ?state of nature?. In Locke’s ?State of Nature? the

?State of Nature? is ordered by the Laws of Nature, including your Natural Rights to Life,




result of agreements made between people living in a ?State of Nature?, he says that the






?State of Nature? but were corrupted by the introduction of property, agriculture, science,



of civilization. All of the differences between Rousseau?s theories when compared to



own good, he figured it would lead to the war of ?all against all?, therefore any

government was better than the ?state of nature?. Locke believed that most people got

along pretty well for the most part by rational intuition, but were always a few ?bad

apples? in the group that forced others to give up their natural rights in a law system in


Locke by saying that they weren?t really looking at the real ?State of Nature?, and that all


?State of Nature? was in fact, a quality brought on by the state of their time. The

Rousseau version of the ?State of Nature? differs greatly from Locke, but from Hobbes


control man?s life in the state of nature, rather he describes the State of Nature as pleasant



seek it out. ?So why a form of social organization? Rousseau asks? He recognized




anarchist view. Even though I can?t say it is the best view or it would even work, it is the


states that the ?State of Nature? would be the best state to live in, a state would not be

necessary. Anarchists view that there are no ?rotten apples?. So far as there are ?rotten

apples? in the society, as Rousseau even suggests, this is a creation of the government.


are created in order to remedy it. In the anarchist?s system the anti-social person will be

abandoned, in a sense left out of the cooperative society. In the anarchist?s view, people

become ?perfected? because they become cooperative and non-aggressive. But if there

were ?bad apples? in a state of anarchism, wouldn?t they become a threat to the society if

their anti-social behavior lead to violence? (which comes back to Hobbes? theory of the

State of Nature that would lead to the war of ?all against all?) And it leads to even more






arguments for every gap or flaw in every rule or theory.

After I?ve been corrupted by so many different ideas of the ?State of Nature?, It?s

hard to state my own idea of it without repeating someone else. But anyhow, In the ?State

of Nature? I?d think of people as generally being cooperative, and smart enough to try and




this case you?d ask again, why is government necessary? however, I?m not sure I would

like to try the anarchist?s system just because of uncertainties of mine about the ?State of

Nature?. We?ve never been in the ?State of Nature? so it would be scary to simply ?try it



ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ  [можно без регистрации]

Ваше имя: