Why Hobbes and Rousseau Have Such Differing Views of Civilization Many people often ask why Hobbes and Rousseau have such differing views of civilization; certainly, these two great philosophers literally appear to be talking about two different worlds when they turn to the fundamental nature of humankind. Over the next several pages, this essay will explore this strange contrast whilst answering some critical questions. Specifically, the paper will address the following matters: why does Rousseau think Hobbes missed the mark concerning the nature of human beings? What critique does he appear to offer of Hobbes? How would Hobbes have responded had he been around to read Rousseau’s work? Essentially, Hobbes was a man who was of the view...The end:
.....ing” may be – and will not consider what the consequences of that action might be. In the end, Hobbes appears to be the more insightful of the two because he recognizes how human beings in a state of nature may, in the process of acting out of their own self-preservation, brutally take from other people with any consideration – if they perceive that they can do so at minimal risk to themselves. All in all, Rousseau has too much regard for humanity’s capacity for goodness. Works Cited Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan, parts I and II. A.P. Martinich (ed.). Pages 13-21, 92-101, and 125-129 (additional information not provided). Rousseau, J.J. The social contract and the discourses. G.D.H. Cole (transl.). 62-116. (additional information not provided).