Art

Character of Humankind in the light of Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes
Competition, diffidence and Glory are three conflicts prominent in the case of humankind, according to Hoobes. All three of these conflicts have different fulfillments in the eyes of humankind the first helps the man overrun other humans for their own gain, the second fulfills their need for safety, and the third for repute (Hobbes 33). Thus we can assume that Hobbes view of the world is a very pessimistic view and intrinsically disbelieve of the foundation of nature and inspirations of humankind. Hobbes explains upon this line of deliberation as he describes the penalties of the ordinary man left to his own plans. In Hobbes point of view, the being should give up their right of ruling over themselves, and penetrate into a promise or communal agreement with the society.

Every man should say to every man, I authorize and give up my right of governing myself to this man, or to this assembly of man, on this condition, that you give up your right to him and authorize all his actions in like manner (Hobbes, 119).

Hobbes alleged this admittance of defeat of human being rights to be inevitable, so much so that it was the only means to avoid the rough and destructive facet of humanity. In the heart of Leviathan, there is a primary thought that the ordinary man is so poorly prepared to attain freedom that it is necessary for a ruling class to exist, whether through realm or governments. What seems to be appealing about Hobbes viewpoint in Leviathan is that they in reality go against the modern time thinking. The rational series of idea from the Renaissance period, where the worth and probability of individual motive was first indicative, to the Enlightenment, is that the worth of human being motive and determination would carry on to be developed ahead. However, the approaches taken up in Hobbes Leviathan appear to be in contradiction with that array of thinking.

Hobbes idea was to try to view how humans would work without a regime.  Since Thomas Hobbes lived in a tempestuous age of English narration the most important illustration can be the being Civil war which was held between 1642 and 1648. Keeping this era in mind, it is clearly evident why Hobbes viewed humans negatively. Hobbes has tried to throw immense light on how he views humans without civilization, regime or a system of ethical values. This is what he calls the State of Nature. From this account of human race, Hobbes tries to clarify how to rule properly. Hobbes was a strong supporter that the geometric principles could be initialized in the politics and thus the resultant would be a perfect government.

Hobbes merely had only one way of showing the right type of government which according to him was to differentiate between what it means to be human and then understand what makes it. In the introduction of his book, Hobbes sees people as coherent machinery ruled by enthusiasm joined by means of motives, For what is the Heart, but a spring and the Nerves, but so many Strings and the joints, but so many Wheels, giving motion to the whole body (Hobbes 1).

One enthusiasm that by no means stops to enchant a human being is their advantage over other people, especially in the light of inferiority. This practically means that human race will always look out for dominance. This can be domination of power, position or gratitude. Enmity arises when two individuals will fight for these reasons and will try to destroy one another. The other reason that will make them fight with each other is competition out of their longings or needs.

Again if items are limited, it is possible that two humans will try to achieve the same object. This will help in creating enmity among them and they will go up to the extent of killing each other. The third cause of hatred would be diffidence. Keeping the Machiavellian view alive, Hobbes argues that a naive individual will be shattered if not they act callously to protect themselves. A human being ought to have defensive skills to protect themselves.

The reason within people will ultimately help them to conclude the way to finish the State of Nature.  This is only possible by relinquishing some if not all power to those who will use that power to generate a structure within which the individual will have a level of safety, confidence and tranquility thus leading to contentment. Hobbes believed that only a combined solitary control can productively hold back the chaos that the State of Nature poses and represents and this is what he claims to be the Leviathan.

Locke views on Slavery in the light of of Civil Government
Protection of individual freedom is one the main views of John Locke in his political treatise Of Civil Government (Uzgalis). Locke observed liberty as the usual condition of humankind. We must consider what state all men are naturally in, and that is a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possessions and persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature without asking leave or depending upon the will of any other man (Locke 4).

The most effective element of this passage in admiration to the accurately progressive life of John Locke is his use of the phrase, all men. Locke considers all humans to be one and does not make any differentiation with respect to the creed, class, religion. In this respect he also condemns slavery from being an element of differentiation among any nation that identifies itself to be free.

Slavery is simply defined as being enslaved or being controlled by power of another human. Locke defines slavery to be an outcome of being an unfair antagonist overpowered in war. The person who wins can then either enslave the defeated human or kill him. Locke tries to inform us in his treatise that slavery is actually a continuity of the state of war among the legitimate defeater and an enslaved, in which the defeater hinders to kill the enslaved, and rather makes him a slave (Uzgalis).

There has been a big chunk of literature written over the last forty to fifty years arguing that looking at the involvement of John Locke with operative and colonial regime, the conjecture of enslavement was planned to give reason for the organization and observation of slavery in England during the 18th century. This does not sound very likely of John Locke and if he wanted to do so, Locke would have much enhanced his view with a greatly more comprehensive meaning of rightful slavery than the one he gives.

When we read Lockes Of Civil Government, we will further be able to understand the opposing views of Locke on slavery.Every man has a property in his own person this nobody has any right to but himself (Locke 27). His physical efforts and the work done by his hands are righteously his. The thought of humans as belongings is one that is clearly culpable to John Locke. When we go back to review what influence John Locke had over the founders of the nation, this point of view on slavery becomes more apparent. Slavery is an ongoing war, with submission on one end and partial authority on the other. If this ceases, slavery ceases. The cause that can cease slavery is that no man, can, by agreement pass over to another that which he hath not in himself, a power over his own life (Locke 24).

Locke also identifies his main discussion to be based on legitimate slavery which is very important in early political philosophy simply because it identifies that the lawful presence of tyranny, defines and clarifies by disparity, the character of unlawful slavery as observed in 18th century England. Illegitimate slavery on the other hand is just taking over someones freedom without a valid cause or motive. Locke takes this line of consideration as he explains equality of all men. He states,

This freedom from absolute, arbitrary power, is so necessary to, and closely joined with a mans preservation, that he cannot part with it, but by what forfeits his preservation and life together for a man, not having the power of his own life, cannot, by compact, or his own consent, enslave himself to any one, nor put himself under the absolute, arbitrary power of another, to take away his life, when he pleases (Locke, 22).
Lockes line of philosophy is not only different with Hobbes on the issue of government but also they are directly in conflict with their views on slavery which was growing in Europe and the Americas in their times. It is predictable that England in the 18th century elated around 7 million slaves to the Caribbean and the Americas for various purposes. These include United States sugar cultivation and tobacco and cotton cultivation in the United States. Soon, the economists started to realize that the profits which plantation owners were earning because of this free slavery would not have been achievable if they had to in reality pay these people to cultivate their crops.