Summary PHI2010

read over essay and write opinion on it:

Locke’s point of view is different compared to many other philosophers. John Lock says that no one comes to this world with knowledge; everything that we are and learn is through life experience. Locke states that no knowledge is innate of itself. Unlike Descartes, who believes that our most essential items of knowledge must be innate, Locke says that by our sense experience, we can reveal the existence of an external world.

Locke utilizes a series of concepts to allow others to understand his stance on human nature. One of Locke’s point of view is universal consent proves nothing, in this point of view, he says that how can universal consent has misfortune in it. Another thing is, how would mankind not agree in something if we all are born with all the knowledge needed. Locke’s last point and probably the most important is No one has their mind naturally imprinted, because not known to children, idiots, etc. In his last point, he uses the examples of children and an idiot. Locke says that to say that an idea is imprinted and also to say that the mind is ignorant of it is to say that it means nothing.

Thomas Hobbes had a fascinating view of human nature. In his work of art Leviathan he says how in order to survive, there has to be a form of authority that oversees the behavior of others. Hobbes says that humans out of nature are creatures of treacherous, selfish, dishonest, and violent acts. If humans do not have a sense of discipline or a way to follow a ruling, human are bound to fall into a state of war, War of Every Man against Every Man.

Hobbes believes that a sovereign, which he called Leviathan is what can put a balance to humankind and avoid a war of all. Leviathan is a monster mention in the Bible. The monster shows excellent power and strength, which at the same time is something that the normal man can fear to stay in line. Hobbes sees human nature as one that is destructive, a force that needs to be tamed in order to function at its full capacity.

Locke’s and Hobbes’s views differ in many different areas, however, I believe that they can also be very alike in some areas. Locke speaks of people learning what they know by a sense of experience and knowledge. Only by being exposed to it, one can understand what it is. Hobbes says that men kind is selfish, treacherous, dishonest, and violent. If he believes that all men type is like that, then it most means that it something innate. Hobbes reference as all men kind for all men kind to be the same it means that we all have to be exposed to it or be born with that knowledge already.

I agree with both Locke’s and Hobe’s point of view. I have seen what men can do and what humankind is capable of if left unchecked. I do say that when we are born, we are all born with a white sheet, no memories, no memories, and no knowledge. However, this does not mean that I cannot copy the actions of someone else or attempt to be someone else. I do have to say that I agree with Hobbes more, the reason why is because I have been present when mankind has done the worst taking a life. I have been present when someone else took the life of one and attempted to take another, that man is now in jail and will not see daylight. A great example of Leviathan is us taking that man to jail and having it face the court. What was supposed to happen to allow for the man that survived to go take his? Would that be fair?

I am a firm believer in an eye for an eye; however, we do not live in those days. I do believe than humankind needs a higher hierarchy to keep them under control. Everything that Hobbes says about man is true. I have also experienced what occurs when a sovereign attempt to avoid the higher law and make the world his own; by experience, it never works. People believe that they can walk around freely and have immunity by the laws which we all have to abide by. In my personal opinion, Hobbes has a better understanding of what man is and understand mankind better than any other philosopher.