Tuesday, January 29, 2013

Preservation


I found John Locke’s “Two Treatises of Government,” to be an easier read than Thomas Hobbes’ “Leviathan.” Locke’s goes point-by-point in making his argument and avoids complaining about metaphor and then using it anyway. In reading Locke, I couldn’t help but notice the emphasis Locke places on a person’s ability to use reason when forming and making decisions. More specifically, Locke addresses the issue of self-preservation. “By right of self-preservation…it is that every man, in the state of nature, has a power to kill a murderer.” For Locke, the act of killing a murderer, thus preserving others’ lives, would be a service to the greater good, since it would prevent any future murders. Compare that with Thomas Hobbes’ “Leviathan,” where Hobbes speaks of self-preservation in reference to stealing food to preserve one’s life and that of his/her family. “A man would reason thus: If I do it not, I die presently; if I do it, I die afterwards.” Hobbes, like Locke, uses reason as a reason for one to justify breaking the law, because a man may “in defense of his life snatch away another man’s sword.” Locke emphasizes the necessity for a person to be “in the state of nature,” where no man has any power over the next.

3 comments:

  1. Remember, Locke's "State of Nature" is but a stepping stone to Civil Government. Ahh, if we could have only stayed there . . .

    ReplyDelete
  2. Preservation of life does seem to be the absolute law of nature, and both Hobbes and Locke were keen to pick up on it. Predator and prey will naturally even themselves out over time; evolution serves to better a creature for its own preservation; and we as humans, desirous of keeping our neurons firing, have come to a point where pumping ourselves full of preservatives is favorable to a natural death. A law on paper should not contradict a law of nature, so self-defense and self-preservation should be lawful.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What strikes me about Locke and Hobbes is that Hobbes seems to lean on tradition, while Locke seems to go back to the very basics of nature. It's extremely hard to respect Hobbes' views in light of centuries of history as well as basic logic.

    Also, Hobbes can't write too well. So there's that.

    ReplyDelete