Artwork

Content provided by Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Podcast App
Go offline with the Player FM app!

The Great Debate Between Hobbes and Locke Finally Settled?

1:04:36
 
Share
 

Manage episode 169920074 series 114681
Content provided by Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.

While Hobbes and Locke are two of the most important thinkers of Modern, Liberal Political Philosophy, they had radically different views about the best sort of regime human beings could create through the Social Contract. According to Hobbes's pessimistic view of human nature, he believed individuals were too vainglorious and ambitious to create, and participate in, a representative democracy. Only an all-powerful authoritarian ruler would be able to keep the citizens in line and the state stable and secure. Locke took a different approach. Individually and passionately opposed to any form of monarchy or centralized power, Locke argued that individuals were more reasonable than Hobbes thought, and the civil institutions of society more deeply grounded. Human beings could, Locke argued, create a democratic form of government with limited power, and sustain the enterprise over time. As we know, Locke seems to have one the debate, but recent socio-cultural and political events may prove Hobbes right.

  continue reading

90 episodes

Artwork
iconShare
 
Manage episode 169920074 series 114681
Content provided by Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey. All podcast content including episodes, graphics, and podcast descriptions are uploaded and provided directly by Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey or their podcast platform partner. If you believe someone is using your copyrighted work without your permission, you can follow the process outlined here https://player.fm/legal.

While Hobbes and Locke are two of the most important thinkers of Modern, Liberal Political Philosophy, they had radically different views about the best sort of regime human beings could create through the Social Contract. According to Hobbes's pessimistic view of human nature, he believed individuals were too vainglorious and ambitious to create, and participate in, a representative democracy. Only an all-powerful authoritarian ruler would be able to keep the citizens in line and the state stable and secure. Locke took a different approach. Individually and passionately opposed to any form of monarchy or centralized power, Locke argued that individuals were more reasonable than Hobbes thought, and the civil institutions of society more deeply grounded. Human beings could, Locke argued, create a democratic form of government with limited power, and sustain the enterprise over time. As we know, Locke seems to have one the debate, but recent socio-cultural and political events may prove Hobbes right.

  continue reading

90 episodes

All episodes

×
 
Loading …

Welcome to Player FM!

Player FM is scanning the web for high-quality podcasts for you to enjoy right now. It's the best podcast app and works on Android, iPhone, and the web. Signup to sync subscriptions across devices.

 

Quick Reference Guide