The Best And Worst Of Human Nature

1 Pages 364 Words

'The best and worst of human nature, as would be expounded by Thomas Hobbes and John Locke, are demonstrated in these new lands and cultures.' It is true that the best and worst of human nature are demonstrated in these new lands and cultures. In the views of Locke and Hobbes are two very different points of view.
In Thomas Hobbes point of view, human beings are organisms in motion and need to be restrained by authority from pursuing selfish ends. In the case of the Natives, he would have said that Spain had the right to conquer the Bahamas because the people had no leader that seemed to be apparent. Hobbes would have said that the people who lived in the Bahamas were not able to think for themselves and needed an authority, a King, to rule over the people. Thomas Hobbes said that if a man had acquired delight, moderate power or an already good life, the man would want more and delve into his own selfish needs. Hobbes said that without men being afraid that someone would stop them being selfish, any society would fall apart. There would be no one to stop men from acquiring too much or being too selfish.
John Locke would have said that individuals form a community for their mutual benefit. Locke also said that, ‘all men were, by nature, free, equal and independent’ and no one can subject to ‘the Political Power of another, without his own Consent.’ John Locke would have said that the Natives of the Bahamas were not respected. He might also have said that their rights were being compromised and that the Spanish should not have conquered them. The Natives as a people never asked to be conquered. The Natives were a community. John Locke had said that, ‘the act of the Majority passes for the act of the whole, and of course determines as having by the law of Nature and Reason the power of a whole.’ This would mean that the Natives were already their own government and that they would not delve into selfish needs because their...