Introduction
Social and political order is often a subject that interests political philosophers such as Hobbes and Locke. On the other hand, the understanding of their philosophical perspectives about politics can be summed up into the context of the phrase “State of Nature”. In today’s contemporary politics, the concept of State of Nature had a profound effect in the way policies are created. In this discussion, the context of State of Nature as a political philosophy and it affect the decision that the government makes. In addition, the work of Hobbes and Locke will be interpreted within the described context including insights about how the works of the two political philosophers influence domestic and international political relations.
According to Hobbes and Locke, things will go out of control in the state of nature (Cervellati, Fortunato, and Sunde). This can be characterized by the lack or social order due to inexistence of policies, hence conflict becomes apparent within the society. This means that leaving everything in the state of nature constitutes life described by Hobbes as poor, short, and brutal. This is because every person can be vulnerable to predation, and governments were formed in order to protect ones existence. It is the same perspective that explains why policies are made, which is to draw the lines between what is attainable and what is not in the state of nature. In addition, the concept of state of nature influence the way policies were made because policies are more often created as the political system’s response to social conflict. For example, a simple policy on road speed limits emphasizes the importance of road safety for everyone to follow because recklessness is a part of human nature that constitutes endangerment of others. This explains why the concept of state of nature influence the way policies are made, which are to protect and constitute social order (Theriault).
Perspectives from Hobbes and Locke
Hobbes and Locke’s view of politics and disposition on the concept of state of nature is contradicting, but the essence of their philosophical assertion is somewhat consistent when looking at how the government makes decisions. Hobbes argue that in social contract, the King should be the absolute head of the government with powers that cannot be disputed by the people, and this is to encompass the idea of social order. Meanwhile, Locke believes that social contract is between the government and the people where in the state of nature, life, liberty, and property exists. In terms of how the government makes decisions in relation to Hobbes and Locke’s writings, it can be argued that the government decisions in todays contemporary politics is leaning towards democratic predisposition. This means that, the domestic policies and decisions encompass the idea of protecting the people from one another while preserving individual rights and liberty. For instance, when the government decides to establish a trade relation with a foreign nation, it involves strengthening the nation’s economy, which in effect improves the lives of the people. In terms of international affairs, Locke’s argument relates to how the government establishes peaceful relations with other nations through multilateral agreements that bears mutual benefit for the people and the state. This is because the state of nature can be a potential vehicle for possible international conflict.
Conclusion
Hobbes and Locke present a contradicting view on the concept of state of nature, but the context of their political philosophies are the foundation of today’s political institutions. Although the view of State of Nature by Hobbes is more on concentrating political control into a single entity, its ulterior motive is still to preserve social order and prevent conflict from emerging as a result of lack of policy. On the other hand, Locke’s argument suggests the social order and control can be achieved without undermining liberty, life, and property because the state of nature also applies on the government’s potential to employ power to destroy and not the preservation of the people’s interests.
Works Cited
Cervellati, Matteo, Piergiuseppe Fortunato, and Uwe Sunde. Hobbes To Rousseau: Inequality, Institutions, And Development. Bonn, Germany: Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit Institute for the Study of Labor, 2005. Web. 7 May 2016. Discussion Paper No. 1450.
Theriault, Sawyer. "John Locke And The Second Treatise On Government". Student Pulse 1.10 (2009): 1-2. Web. 7 May 2016.
