Question

Compare Locke and Rousseau on the question of property. Rousseau says that property is the source of inequality and misery for the species, while Locke had said property improves our lives greatly. Which philosopher seems more persuasive to you?2. Rousseau tries to correct Hobbes' understanding of human nature by saying that human beings are naturally compassionate creatures. Does that seem persuasive? Can you think of examples you have seen in the world that show that human beings are naturally compassionate? Or, to the contrary, can you vindicate Hobbes, that most of us are nasty, selfish creatures?

Answer 1

1. I would agree with Locke and his view that property improves human life greatly. Locke held that that the earth must be thought of as originally belonging to all humankind in common. With this in mind, an ethical principle that allows the common property to be distributed fairly as private property should be identified and recognised by private individuals. This principle is essential as it parallels every human’s right to have a share of the natural goods that the earth provides.

Please post the other question separately.