| Hobbes Vs. Locke | |
|
+4Tyrong Kojy WeiWuWei MightyObserver enviro 8 posters |
|
Author | Message |
---|
enviro Member of the Supreme Council
Posts : 2629 Join date : 2008-02-05 Age : 25 Location : bite the power
| Subject: Hobbes Vs. Locke Thu May 07, 2009 5:11 am | |
| we are currently reading lord of the flies(an amazing book) which explores hobbes and lockes opinions
Hobbes stated the following: man is naturaly born evil and savage. the only reason he stays good is becuase society is watching. people will revert to savageness when "big brother" isnt watching. People crave someone to make decisions(a king). people prefer the social contract
Locke says: people are born with blank slates. people are bad or good because of the experinces around them
who do you belive. i personally say hobbes. I have seen a lot of bad things happen when the school authorities arent watching. If that is what people do when no one is watching at school, what about other places.(and example is swearing.)
state your opinion and why im trying to be serious so dont "derail" this | |
|
| |
MightyObserver World Republic Party Member
Posts : 670 Join date : 2008-09-30 Age : 31 Location : Earth
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Thu May 07, 2009 5:53 am | |
|
Last edited by MightyObserver on Fri May 08, 2009 3:57 am; edited 1 time in total | |
|
| |
WeiWuWei World Republic Party Member
Posts : 624 Join date : 2008-04-14 Age : 47
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Thu May 07, 2009 7:52 am | |
| I'd take Locke over Hobbes any day. I absolutely loathed Leviathan; it is, essentially, the quintessential handbook for despots.
As for Locke, I mean, he's not great, but I think some of his views are interesting. I think that his views on natural rights are decent. And, actually, I like his labor theory of property - but I sort of take his theory and severely bastardize its original meaning to make it legitimize communal ownership, as opposed to the kind of private ownership that he favored. I could elucidate on that, but I'm super-tired and don't feel like it. | |
|
| |
Tyrong Kojy Member of the Supreme Council
Posts : 2142 Join date : 2008-04-11 Age : 37 Location : Canada
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Thu May 07, 2009 8:26 am | |
| Locke is right, hoever in order to survive any human CAN, not always but CAN be one of the single most savage creatures in existance. | |
|
| |
enviro Member of the Supreme Council
Posts : 2629 Join date : 2008-02-05 Age : 25 Location : bite the power
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Thu May 07, 2009 2:53 pm | |
| i think it depends on the case, but in most i agree with hobbes. people turn evil and savage, and not becuase of thier aup-brining. | |
|
| |
CoolKidX Chairman of the Supreme Council
Posts : 4639 Join date : 2008-02-14 Location : Netherlands
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Thu May 07, 2009 3:58 pm | |
| - Tyrong Kojy wrote:
- Locke is right, hoever in order to survive any human CAN, not always but CAN be one of the single most savage creatures in existance.
I second this mad genius. | |
|
| |
Zealot_Kommunizma Hero of the World Republic
Posts : 5413 Join date : 2007-12-06 Age : 35 Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Thu May 07, 2009 10:38 pm | |
| - enviro wrote:
- i think it depends on the case, but in most i agree with hobbes. people turn evil and savage, and not becuase of thier aup-brining.
Accordin to your own initial post, you're not following what Hobbes says. Hobbes is stating that people are born savage and evil and are just good because society is watching. Funny... so a bunch of evildoers keep other evildoers from commiting evil. This doesn't make the least tadbit of sense. I shit on Hobbes any day. We humans are naturally social beings, interdependant. We thrive as communities, we need each other. How can we naturally be "evil" when our entire existance and development is (or should be) based on constructive interaction? Not only is Hobbes assertion (accrding to the OP) ridiculous, it's been proven wrong numerous times. | |
|
| |
enviro Member of the Supreme Council
Posts : 2629 Join date : 2008-02-05 Age : 25 Location : bite the power
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Fri May 08, 2009 1:08 am | |
| so gas lockes
many people act evil when society isnt watching just becuase they can? you cant assert your opinion that locke is right over hobbes, and both are liable thoerys?
also what is your view on the social contract? | |
|
| |
Tyrong Kojy Member of the Supreme Council
Posts : 2142 Join date : 2008-04-11 Age : 37 Location : Canada
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Fri May 08, 2009 2:32 am | |
| - Quote :
- many people act evil when society isnt watching just becuase they can?
Nobody's perfect. I know it's a lame excuse, but true. Zeal's right, we're social beings, however if personal survival comes into question, more often than not society can suckle my cockle. And yes, it need not be just about society. Plain and simple, everyone is different, and no human condition is 100% predictable. | |
|
| |
enviro Member of the Supreme Council
Posts : 2629 Join date : 2008-02-05 Age : 25 Location : bite the power
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Fri May 08, 2009 2:43 am | |
| but you cannot say hobbes is wrong? what your saying(and im aggre ing to) is that both are right in vertain people and certain conditions?
is that waht your saying? | |
|
| |
Zealot_Kommunizma Hero of the World Republic
Posts : 5413 Join date : 2007-12-06 Age : 35 Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Fri May 08, 2009 3:18 am | |
| - enviro wrote:
- so gas lockes
Eh? - enviro wrote:
many people act evil when society isnt watching just becuase they can? I wonder... when isn't society watching? Most crimes or "evil acts" are commited under "societal surveillance" (whatever that is supposed to mean). - enviro wrote:
you cant assert your opinion that locke is right over hobbes, and both are liable thoerys? I didn't even mentione Locke, however he does make far more sense than Hobbes. - enviro wrote:
also what is your view on the social contract? It is absolutely pointless. Objectivity is required. People develop in accordance to their material conditions: from their bodily charactersitics (forged by genes, mother's health during pregnancy, mother's capability to feed herself, etc.) to their natural and social environments. People are not born "evil", people are at best born mentally ill or disabled and this won't even mean they'll be "evil". A hostile community breeds hostile individuals, an environment in which individuals are materially limited will have their capabilities greatly limited and so on. And as Tyrong said, if survival is threattened, people will search for ways to preserve their integroty even if at expense of the community for example through theft, murder, blackmailing, kidnapping etc. Oh wait... this is what society is exactly based on right now... I wonder why so many individuals are that hostile and frustrated and why so many individuals are unable to understand simple yet essential truths...
Last edited by Zealot_Kommunizma on Fri May 08, 2009 7:35 am; edited 1 time in total | |
|
| |
Tyrong Kojy Member of the Supreme Council
Posts : 2142 Join date : 2008-04-11 Age : 37 Location : Canada
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Fri May 08, 2009 7:10 am | |
| - Quote :
- is that waht your saying?
Yeah. Basically. | |
|
| |
Black_Cross Chairman of the WR Committee
Posts : 1702 Join date : 2008-04-04 Age : 35 Location : Sisyphean Hell
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Fri May 08, 2009 10:04 pm | |
| - Quote :
- I shit on Hobbes any day.
I don't need to go in depth here since there's really been no substantiation of Hobbes ridiculous assertion, so i'll just say i agree with above quote. - Quote :
- in order to survive any human CAN, not always but CAN be one of the single most savage creatures in existance
I think it goes a little deeper than just survival, but this is a pretty big problem we're looking at today. | |
|
| |
Tyrong Kojy Member of the Supreme Council
Posts : 2142 Join date : 2008-04-11 Age : 37 Location : Canada
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Fri May 08, 2009 10:42 pm | |
| - Quote :
- I think it goes a little deeper than just survival,
Yeah. Sorry if I made it sound like that. Things are indeed more complicated than jsut survival, but it was an aexample, is all. | |
|
| |
Zealot_Kommunizma Hero of the World Republic
Posts : 5413 Join date : 2007-12-06 Age : 35 Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Fri May 08, 2009 11:26 pm | |
| - Tyrong Kojy wrote:
-
- Quote :
- I think it goes a little deeper than just survival,
Yeah. Sorry if I made it sound like that. Things are indeed more complicated than jsut survival, but it was an aexample, is all. Your point was clear enough I'd say, just maybe some won't pay attention to the full extent of what you implied. | |
|
| |
Liche Chairman of the Supreme Council
Posts : 4613 Join date : 2008-01-30 Age : 30 Location : USA-Virginia
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Sat May 09, 2009 2:34 am | |
| | |
|
| |
CoolKidX Chairman of the Supreme Council
Posts : 4639 Join date : 2008-02-14 Location : Netherlands
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Sat May 09, 2009 2:45 pm | |
| Locke is k.
But Hobbes might be right to. | |
|
| |
Zealot_Kommunizma Hero of the World Republic
Posts : 5413 Join date : 2007-12-06 Age : 35 Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Sat May 09, 2009 6:39 pm | |
| - CoolKidX wrote:
But Hobbes might be right to. So you're desperatly wanting the screw others over and don't do that just because you fear punishment? | |
|
| |
CoolKidX Chairman of the Supreme Council
Posts : 4639 Join date : 2008-02-14 Location : Netherlands
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Sat May 09, 2009 6:58 pm | |
| - Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:
- CoolKidX wrote:
But Hobbes might be right to. So you're desperatly wanting the screw others over and don't do that just because you fear punishment? Not me, but I might think others do actually. | |
|
| |
Liche Chairman of the Supreme Council
Posts : 4613 Join date : 2008-01-30 Age : 30 Location : USA-Virginia
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Sat May 09, 2009 7:59 pm | |
| I actually didnt know much about Hobbse until this thread | |
|
| |
Black_Cross Chairman of the WR Committee
Posts : 1702 Join date : 2008-04-04 Age : 35 Location : Sisyphean Hell
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Sat May 09, 2009 9:37 pm | |
| - Tyrong Kojy wrote:
-
- Quote :
- I think it goes a little deeper than just survival,
Yeah. Sorry if I made it sound like that. Things are indeed more complicated than jsut survival, but it was an aexample, is all. I didn't mean that as a critique necessarily, i was just stating my own position. - Quote :
- Not me, but I might think others do actually.
Hobbes made a generalization about our nature. If you don't feel this way, and [you think] Hobbes is right, it kinda makes you a freak, if you see my meaning. It also means that only absolute submission to authority can keep people civil. This has been disproven by collective experience. <<< Hobbes | |
|
| |
Zealot_Kommunizma Hero of the World Republic
Posts : 5413 Join date : 2007-12-06 Age : 35 Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Sat May 09, 2009 9:55 pm | |
| - CoolKidX wrote:
Not me, but I might think others do actually. Then you simply don't agree with Hobbes because he says we all are naturally that way. - BC wrote:
- It also means that only absolute submission to authority can keep people civil. This has been disproven by collective experience.
And by simple logic. How can uncivilized beings rule over other uncivilized beings and keep them civilized? How can evil people serve as authority to keep other evil people from being evil? Isn't that just logicly senseless? It's pretty much like the "people are stupid" "arguement". If people are stupid, how can stupid people make other people behave in an intelligent way? Or worse, the "all people are stupid but me" or yet worse "all people are stupid (including myself) but him/them" which fits with the profile drone-like fervent follower of some leader. People can't rule themselves so they need people to rule over them. To which I'd reply: No but yes, none and all. In the end, beginning. | |
|
| |
Black_Cross Chairman of the WR Committee
Posts : 1702 Join date : 2008-04-04 Age : 35 Location : Sisyphean Hell
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Sat May 09, 2009 10:03 pm | |
| - Quote :
- People can't rule themselves so they need people to rule over them.
To which I'd reply: No but yes, none and all. In the end, beginning. *Golf Claps* - Quote :
- And by simple logic. How can uncivilized beings rule over other uncivilized beings and keep them civilized? How can evil people serve as authority to keep other evil people from being evil? Isn't that just logicly senseless?
you know what i think. I was just making sure everyone knows the evidence going against Hobbes' assertion, since some didn't come to the same conclusion. | |
|
| |
CoolKidX Chairman of the Supreme Council
Posts : 4639 Join date : 2008-02-14 Location : Netherlands
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Sat May 09, 2009 10:15 pm | |
| I dont Hobbes is right, I think he has a little point.
But overall I think Locke is ze most right. | |
|
| |
Zealot_Kommunizma Hero of the World Republic
Posts : 5413 Join date : 2007-12-06 Age : 35 Location : Mexico/Russia/Worl
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke Wed May 20, 2009 1:45 pm | |
| Ah shit, Ihad missed this thread, maybe for some thing I had to do. - BC wrote:
- I was just making sure everyone knows the evidence going against Hobbes' assertion, since some didn't come to the same conclusion.
Unfortunately true. - CoolKidX wrote:
- I dont Hobbes is right, I think he has a little point.
Little point? That people need to be controlled by other people (because somehow stupid people can control stupid people)? Sure, some psychos like himself may require some expert assistance (control included) but definitely society doesn't need wackos like him or who agree with him deciding for everyone. | |
|
| |
Sponsored content
| Subject: Re: Hobbes Vs. Locke | |
| |
|
| |
| Hobbes Vs. Locke | |
|