Perspectives on
Human Nature and
Government
Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)
• Social order is created by
humans. Therefore, they can
change it.
Without government, society would be
solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short!
Thomas Hobbes
• Without society, we would live in a
state of nature, where we each
have unlimited natural freedoms.
• The downside of this general
autonomy is that it includes the
"right to all things" and thus the
freedom to harm all who threaten
one's own self-preservation; there
are no positive rights, only laws of
nature and an endless "war of all
against all" (Bellum omnium
contra omnes).
Thomas Hobbes
• To avoid this, we jointly agree
to an implicit social contract
by which we each gain civil
rights in return for accepting
the obligation to honor the
rights of others, giving up
some freedoms to do so.
Thomas Hobbes
• People need order.
• People will be willing to give up
individual liberties to maintain
peace.
• The social contract is an agreement to
obey the laws.
• But, human nature will not allow this to
happen!
• Thus, the need for authoritarian government.
John Locke (1632-1704)
• Locke observed that, in society,
people were rewarded based upon
their industriousness.
• But, people should not accumulate
too much money, otherwise society
could become a horrible place.
• He proposed (like Hobbes before
him) that people needed a sense of
order. But how to achieve order
while maximizing individual
liberties?
John Locke
• Locke stressed the moral imperative that
prevented humans from pursuing a free-for-all.
• A moral imperative is a principle originating
inside a person's mind that compels him to act.
• Originally defined by Immanuel Kant, the
imperative was meant to be a dictate of pure
reason, in its practical aspect. Not following the
moral law was seen to be self-defeating and thus
contrary to reason.
John Locke
• Locke took the imperative to
originate in conscience, as the
divine voice speaking through
the human spirit. The dictates
of conscience are simply right
and often resist further
justification.
• Locke’s faith in conscience stem
from the idea that man was born a
clean slate (tabula rasa) and was
taught morality by society.
John Locke
Tabula rasa (clean slate) refers to the
epistemological thesis that individual
human beings are born with no innate or
built-in mental content, in a word, "blank,"
and that their entire resource of knowledge is
built up gradually from their experiences
and sensory perceptions of the outside world.
Proponents of tabula rasa favor
"nurture" in the nature versus
nurture debate.
John Locke
• In Locke's philosophy, tabula rasa is the
theory that data is added to the human
mind and rules for processing are formed
solely by one's sensory experiences.
• As understood by Locke, tabula rasa
emphasizes the individual's freedom to
author his or her own soul. Each individual
is free to define the content of his or her
character.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778)
• Rousseau believed in the concept
of the noble savage; humanity
unencumbered by civilization; the
“normal” essence of an unfettered
human.
• Since the concept embodies the
idea that without the bounds of
civilization, humans are essentially good, the
basis for the idea of the noble savage lies in the
doctrine of the goodness of humans.
• Pride and civilization distance humanity from its
original, natural state of goodness.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau
• Agreed with Hobbes’ Social Contract:
mutual agreement to protect the rights of
everyone; not only the wealthy.
• No person is above
the law.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau
"Man is born
free; and
everywhere
he is in
chains."
Jean-Jacques Rousseau
• Human nature is basically good
• Admired the noble savage –
humans living in a state of
simple freedom governing
themselves; compassionate
• Society & civilization are
corrupting forces on the
individual
• Society robs us of our freedom
& makes us “bloodthirsty”
Hobbes (1588-1679):
• Without government, society would be solitary, poor, nasty, brutish,
and short!
• Without society, man would live in a state of nature, where we each
have unlimited natural freedoms.
• State of nature leads to “Right to all things" and thus the freedom
to harm all who threaten one's own self-preservation
• Right to all Things leads to “War of all against all" (Bellum omnium
contra omnes), and thus chaos, anarchy, end of the world-type stuff.
• Humanity needs the Social Contract in which individuals honor the
rights of others but lose certain freedoms. Unfortunately, human
nature will not allow this to happen (we are essentially greedy and
egocentric), thus, the need for authoritarian government.
Locke (1632-1704):
• People need a sense of order.
• Society avoids chaos because of the Moral Imperative.
• The Moral Imperative is based on conscience (God).
• Humans are born as blank slates (tabula rasa), which
means society can instill proper morality, and thus, a
conscience.
• Tabula rasa also implies self-determination and
“nurture” in the nature vs. nurture debate.
Rousseau (1712-1778):
• Believed in the concept of the Noble Savage, in which
humans come from a state of compassionate simplicity.
• Believed that Human Nature is essentially good.
• Pride and civilization distance humanity from its original,
natural state of goodness. "Man is born free; and
everywhere he is in chains."
• Agreed with Hobbes’ Social Contract, but felt more
optimistic of its success.
Moral Reasoning
Lawrence Kohlberg’s
Theory of Moral Development
• Why do some people feel
they must obey the letter of
the law while others believe
that there is a higher law?
– Most countries, including the
United States, are founded
through illegal acts of rebellion
or revolution.
• In order to answer this
question, Kohlberg began to
look at the ways in which
people develop morally.
Lawrence Kohlberg
Kohlberg’s Stages
Kohlberg suggested a stage theory of moral
development:
• Preconventional Morality
1. Punishment / Obedience
2. Personal Reward Orientation (individualism)
• Conventional Morality
3. Interpersonal Orientation (good for group)
4. Authority and Social Order (law & order)
• Postconventional Morality
5. Social Contract Orientation
6. Universal Ethical Principle Orientation
Kohlberg’s Stages:
• Preconventional Morality
Stage 1: Punishment-Obedience Orientation
• Motivation: Avoid (physical) punishment
• MORALITY IS WHAT YOU CAN GET AWAY WITH
• Example: I’ll do the right thing so I don’t get hit.
Stage 2: Personal Reward Orientation
» Motivation: Satisfy own needs
» OBEYS RULES TO OBTAIN REWARDS
» Example: I’ll do the right thing if you give me a
cookie.
Kohlberg’s Stages:
• Conventional Morality
Stage 3: Interpersonal Orientation
• Motivation: “Good boy, good girl”
• OBEYS RULES TO GET APPROVAL.
• Example: I’ll do the right thing to please others.
Stage 4: Authority and Social Order Orientation
• Motivation: Maintain Law and Order
• OBEYS LAWS BECAUSE THEY MAINTAIN THE
SOCIAL ORDER
• Example: I’ll do the right thing because I have
respect for the rules.
Kohlberg’s Stages:
• Postconventional Morality
Stage 5: Social Contract Orientation
• Motivation: Majority Rule
• BELIEF IN DEMOCRATICALLY ACCEPTED
LAWS
• Example: I’ll do the right thing
because it is in everyone’s best
interest.
Kohlberg’s Stages:
• Postconventional Morality
– Stage 6: Universal Ethical Principle
Orientation
• Motivation: Maintain universal principles of
justice, equality, trust, and respect,
regardless of the reactions of others.
• CONSCIENCE
• Example: I’ll do the right thing because my
heart tells me it’s the right thing to do.
Kohlberg’s Method
In order to determine at which stage of
moral development a person was, Kohlberg
presented the person with moral dilemmas
– “The Case of Heinz and the Druggist.”
• Mr. Heinz's wife is dying. There is one drug that will
save her life but it is very expensive. The druggist will
not lower the price so that Mr. Heinz can buy it to save
his wife's life. What should he do? More importantly,
why?
– Moral dilemmas were judged, not according to
the respondent’s position (to steal the drug or
not), but on the basis of the kind of reasoning
the answer exhibited.
Heart of Darkness
• Why do some people maintain their sense of
morality in the absence of law, while others
revert to immoral, amoral, or even savage
behavior?
• Do people need law in order to behave in a
moralistic fashion?
• Can those who live in the absence of
“civilization” maintain a sense of morality?
On what do they base their behavior?
• WHY DO GOOD?