Theories of Human Nature

Paper Summary:

This paper compares Jean-Jacques Rousseau's theory of human nature and civil society with that of Thomas Hobbes'. The paper analyzes which of the two theorists' understanding of human nature has greater contemporary relevance. It provides examples from their works and concludes that Hobbes' theories have far more contemporary relevance.

From the Paper:

"In general, Hobbes's theory seems more relevant to contemporary society than does Rousseau's. Hobbes' idea of the naturally brutish, competitive state of man seems more accurate than Rousseau's notion of the man-born-noble-sovereign. More importantly, Hobbes's theory of the civil state is more relevant to the contemporary state. After all, we do in fact do precisely what Hobbes says: we give up our right to wrest things away from other people, in return for the right to walk down the street without having the shirt ripped off our back. On the other hand, Rousseau's theory of the civil state as a place in which we all share sovereignty has no relevance to our modern state, where numbers are so great that almost no one has any sovereignty (unless one's name is Walton, or Bush, or Oprah, perhaps)."

Sample of Sources Used:

• Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan: The Matter, Form and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiastical and Civil. 1651.
• Hobbes, Thomas and C.B. MacPherson (Ed.) Leviathan. New York: Penguin, 1986. (First published 1651).
• Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract and Discourses. London: Everyman's Library, 1990.

More papers on Theories of Human Nature:

• Analytical Essay # 148883 : "Hindu and Buddhist Theories on Human Nature"
• Research Paper # 45553 : "Cause of Human Nature"
• Essay # 2781 : "Marxism and Hobbe's Concept of Human Nature"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: