I need some help with my high school Euro History class. We're having a major graded discussion/debate tomorrow about Hobbes and Locke but I suck at philosophy and after like 2 hours of reading and researching I still have no cases or arguments.

Basically I have to prepare a case for 4 discussion topics and be prepared to present and defend them. I'll be graded on my understanding of the theories of Hobbes and Locke, my ability to respond to the interpretation made by others, and my "understanding of the wider context of the debate" (euro history at the time?)...

The 4 discussion topics are:

1. Citizens of a state have the right to overthrow their government when that government denies their natural rights.

2. Human nature is inherently good so humans will inevitably will to good. Corrupt governments lead humans astray.

3.An absolute sovereign is the only means to attain and maintain a stable government.

4. In a state of nature humans will degenerate into crime, corruption and evil, a survival of the fittest. Dictatorial leaders save humans from their inevitable downfall.

Anybody who helps me understand the theories of Hobbes/Locke and helps me develop a case for the discussion topics above gets my undying gratitude and a free e-card!

Hobbes Article
Locke Article

EDIT: I'm fairly certain that this blog is legal as I found a bunch of similar threads when I searched philosophy on TL. None of those threads really help me though.
Philosophy Search Results

I promise that my second blog entry will better. I'll fill it with pictures of Tokyo and other interesting stuff.

EDIT II: I ~~hate~~ love yahoo answers.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090923183710AACxrXl

lol...

Caller

Poland8075 Posts

October 18 2009 14:34 GMT

this isn't philosophy this is political theory
secondly it took me over five hours to read just the portions of Hobbes OR Locke that you're looking for.

why don't you try a little harder or better yet read the books instead of their biographies

here's a hint for each:
1. Hobbes supports this but he's rather cautious about it, while Locke considers this not only correct but more of an obligation than a right.
2. Hobbes thinks that humans need a strong leader to take them out of the state of nature, while Locke argues the latter part more strongly.
3. Locke isn't a monarchist. Hobbes wrote a book called "Leviathan."
4. The State of Nature is an abstraction that everybody will be in a state of war, according to Hobbes, or in the case of Locke, a state of total freedom. The latter statement is opposed by both Locke and Hobbes.

Hobbes: supports absolute monarchy, believes the king's rights should be the same as the people's but that he needs to be enlightened, and well prepared to solidify his leadership.
Locke: supports a more representative government, but never actually endorses democracy. His concern is more of the realm of freedom and classical liberalism.

now get off tl and back to work

DoctorHelvetica

United States15034 Posts

October 18 2009 14:46 GMT

There are some really good books about the classical political philosopher that give a pretty in-depth look into their philosophies in a modern context and language. I suggest "Inventors of Ideas" you could probably find it in any college library.

Aesop

Hungary11305 Posts

October 18 2009 14:49 GMT

What made you think this can be done within a few hours on the day before the debate? Reading and understanding the texts is a prerequisite and you would quickly be be at a point where you would understand what the authors would answer to the questions given.

For some emergency help, maybe the Stanford Encyclopedia can help you: http://plato.stanford.edu/

edit: http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes-moral/ , http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-political/

madnessman

United States1581 Posts

October 18 2009 14:53 GMT

Oops. The Hobbes Article was called Political Philosophy and the articles that I posted (which my teacher gave us as resources instead of the original books/essays) are from a philosophy site but I guess this is more of a political science question.

I agree with the views stated in your "hints" but....
1. I'm planning on supporting the statement since it's in the US constitution and most people agree with it today. But doesn't Hobbes say that the subjects cannot lawfully change the form the government (#1 of the 12 principle rights or something)?
2. I'm not sure about this one. Locke believes that a corrupt government will lead humans astray and he believes in self-rule but Hobbes believes that in the "state of nature" humans will degrade to war and chaos... right?
3. According to the Wikipedia Article on Leviathan, doesn't Hobbes support a monarchy?

EDIT: We only started our "new philosophies and science" unit 3 days ago and the only assigned/given Hobbes and Locke readings are the ones I posted in the OP. We aren't expected to read the original texts (this is only a high school AP class). I'm off to read the stanford encyclopedia articles now.

Caller

Poland8075 Posts

October 18 2009 16:14 GMT

On October 18 2009 23:53 madnessman wrote:
Oops. The Hobbes Article was called Political Philosophy and the articles that I posted (which my teacher gave us as resources instead of the original books/essays) are from a philosophy site but I guess this is more of a political science question.

I agree with the views stated in your "hints" but....
1. I'm planning on supporting the statement since it's in the US constitution and most people agree with it today. But doesn't Hobbes say that the subjects cannot lawfully change the form the government (#1 of the 12 principle rights or something)?
2. I'm not sure about this one. Locke believes that a corrupt government will lead humans astray and he believes in self-rule but Hobbes believes that in the "state of nature" humans will degrade to war and chaos... right?
3. According to the Wikipedia Article on Leviathan, doesn't Hobbes support a monarchy?

EDIT: We only started our "new philosophies and science" unit 3 days ago and the only assigned/given Hobbes and Locke readings are the ones I posted in the OP. We aren't expected to read the original texts (this is only a high school AP class). I'm off to read the stanford encyclopedia articles now.

1. They cannot change the form of government so long as the government does not violate the social contract. But that was the entire point of #1.
2. The state of nature, according to Hobbes, is chaos. The state of nature, according to Locke, is freedom.
3. That was the hint.