Introduction: Social-Contract: Hobbes vs. Locke
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are two of the political philosophers famous in their theory about Social-Contract. Social-Contract refers to the entering of man to a given social system wherein he/she becomes part of that system and the system becomes part of him/her. That system includes duties and rights/privileges of man as part of the contract. Not following the rules which is part of the contract merits punishment.
Although Hobbes’ and Locke’s political philosophy is about Social-Contract, they have both opposing views.Hobbes is known in his emphasis on man’s natural rights. In line with this, man’s basic natural right is his/her right to live. In order for man to continue living, he/she needs to survive. John Locke, on the other hand, is known in his emphasis on the natural laws of man. Natural laws refer to the laws that are understood to be “given”. Because of their “being-given”, these laws need no more definition or further explanation. They are known by natural reason. Even though we humans need first to survive, we should not take for granted the natural laws which are absolute. In every Social-Contract, laws and rights exist. Hobbes focused on thenatural rights while Locke focused onthe natural laws.
Hobbes viewed man’s life and nature negatively while John Locke viewed man’s life and nature positively. For Hobbes, man is in nature selfish. Man will do everything in order for him/her to survive even though he/she can do harm to others. This is what we call “psychological egoism.” This is the reason why people steal, cheat, becomes jealous and becomes insecure to others. Man has a surplus of needs and wants wherein he/she will try to do all the means in order to satisfy them. For Locke, on the other hand, man is in nature good. The goodness of man is innate in him. In connection to Rousseau, man is in nature good only that, in entering the society, he/she is being corrupted and influenced. Man is vulnerable to such corruption.
Summary: Lord of the Flies
The movie “Lord of the Flies” is about a group of British boys living in an island due to a plane/ship crash. These boys lived in a mountainous and tree-filled island left on their own. With this situation, they need to maximize the given and possible resources in order for them to survive. In their early days of living in that island, Ralph stood as their leader. He distributed different works to his companions. One day, Jack, one of the elder boys in the group, decided to leave and stop maintaining the fire, instead, went to hunt pigs. The purpose of the fire is for them to be noticed by a plane, ship or helicopter. In noticing them, they can be rescued. Because the fire was not maintained, they were not noticed and rescued by the helicopter. Ralph got mad to Jack for not following instructions. Jack and some of the boys decided to separate from the group and made another one. Ralph’s companions left were Piggy, Simon, the twins and other boys whose names unmentioned. Later, other boys transferred to Jack. One evening, because of fear and wrong expectations, Jack and his group killed Simon. They taught he was a monster. As the story continues, the clash between the two groups becomes heavier. Later, Piggy died because one of Jack’s groupmates pushed a heavy rock and it fall to Piggy. One day, they also attempted to kill Ralph until the Marines discovered them in that island. It was the end of the story.
Hobbes and Locke in “Lord of the Flies”
In the movie “Lord of the Flies”, we can see the different philosophies of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke about Social-Contract. We can see Hobbes’ philosophy in their living in the island wherein they do everything in order to survive. They do all the means be it good or evil. Later in the movie, the boys were divided into two groups, the one with Ralph as the leader and the other with Jack as the leader. Their division started when Ralph got mad to Jack for not maintaining the fire, instead went to hunt pigs. Ralph has a point because Jack did not do his duty. If he only did his duty, maybe by the time the helicopter passed through them, they were noticed and rescued. Locke, in his philosophy, would emphasize duty over the rights/privileges because focusing on privileges is so selfish, for the self to benefit alone, while focusing on duty is selfless, for the betterment of all (in relation to politics). Jack was so focused in his rights (right to decide, right of freedom, right to answer the call of nature), wherein he take for granted his duty.
For me, Ralph’s group is that with Lockian perspective while Jack’s group is that with Hobbian perspective. Ralph and Piggy is so positive wherein they still have a hope of being rescued. Jack and his group did not entertain the possibility of being rescued. In Hobbes’s Social-Contract, man enters into a social-contract in order to survive. Man wants to join to a contract to be like that of others within the contract. Some of Ralph’s groupmates transferred to Jack because they have no hope of being rescued and they can feel more security and abundance with Jack’s group (because of hunting).They can feel that Jack’s group is powerful than that of Ralph’s. Ralph and Jack had different ways in running their group. At first, in Ralph’s leadership (when they were still united), all has the right to speak only that one has to use the big shell. The big shell was used to gather them. Whoever holds it has the right to express his views to all. With this kind of leadership, I can say that Ralph’s leadership is democratic. On the other hand, Jack’s leadership is monarchical. Everyone depends in his decision. He is the only one who has a say, who has a command. That is why, in the movie, the twins were only slaves. If they did not Ralph’s group, maybe they are all equal.
Synthesis
To survive is the very basic need of man. He/she should secure his/her survival first before he/she can do other things. If man cannot survive, how can he/she do other things? That is why man has the tendency to be so selfish in his/her hard times in his/her life. Hobbes has a point that somehow man is selfish. Man must secure first his/her self before he/she can offer any help to others. The phrase you cannot give what you don’t have is very true. That is why those who are abundant are the people who are capable of sharing and giving. I also agree to Locke’s view on man’s nature as good. There is a sense of goodness in every human being. That is why, we can also see situations wherein poor people offers help to others who `are in need. We cannot deny the fact that we can feel a “yearning” in is to help if we see anyone who is in need. Even though Hobbes and Locke have different philosophies, they both contain different sides of Truth. Man is bot selfish and good in nature.
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are two of the political philosophers famous in their theory about Social-Contract. Social-Contract refers to the entering of man to a given social system wherein he/she becomes part of that system and the system becomes part of him/her. That system includes duties and rights/privileges of man as part of the contract. Not following the rules which is part of the contract merits punishment.
Although Hobbes’ and Locke’s political philosophy is about Social-Contract, they have both opposing views.Hobbes is known in his emphasis on man’s natural rights. In line with this, man’s basic natural right is his/her right to live. In order for man to continue living, he/she needs to survive. John Locke, on the other hand, is known in his emphasis on the natural laws of man. Natural laws refer to the laws that are understood to be “given”. Because of their “being-given”, these laws need no more definition or further explanation. They are known by natural reason. Even though we humans need first to survive, we should not take for granted the natural laws which are absolute. In every Social-Contract, laws and rights exist. Hobbes focused on thenatural rights while Locke focused onthe natural laws.
Hobbes viewed man’s life and nature negatively while John Locke viewed man’s life and nature positively. For Hobbes, man is in nature selfish. Man will do everything in order for him/her to survive even though he/she can do harm to others. This is what we call “psychological egoism.” This is the reason why people steal, cheat, becomes jealous and becomes insecure to others. Man has a surplus of needs and wants wherein he/she will try to do all the means in order to satisfy them. For Locke, on the other hand, man is in nature good. The goodness of man is innate in him. In connection to Rousseau, man is in nature good only that, in entering the society, he/she is being corrupted and influenced. Man is vulnerable to such corruption.
Summary: Lord of the Flies
The movie “Lord of the Flies” is about a group of British boys living in an island due to a plane/ship crash. These boys lived in a mountainous and tree-filled island left on their own. With this situation, they need to maximize the given and possible resources in order for them to survive. In their early days of living in that island, Ralph stood as their leader. He distributed different works to his companions. One day, Jack, one of the elder boys in the group, decided to leave and stop maintaining the fire, instead, went to hunt pigs. The purpose of the fire is for them to be noticed by a plane, ship or helicopter. In noticing them, they can be rescued. Because the fire was not maintained, they were not noticed and rescued by the helicopter. Ralph got mad to Jack for not following instructions. Jack and some of the boys decided to separate from the group and made another one. Ralph’s companions left were Piggy, Simon, the twins and other boys whose names unmentioned. Later, other boys transferred to Jack. One evening, because of fear and wrong expectations, Jack and his group killed Simon. They taught he was a monster. As the story continues, the clash between the two groups becomes heavier. Later, Piggy died because one of Jack’s groupmates pushed a heavy rock and it fall to Piggy. One day, they also attempted to kill Ralph until the Marines discovered them in that island. It was the end of the story.
Hobbes and Locke in “Lord of the Flies”
In the movie “Lord of the Flies”, we can see the different philosophies of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke about Social-Contract. We can see Hobbes’ philosophy in their living in the island wherein they do everything in order to survive. They do all the means be it good or evil. Later in the movie, the boys were divided into two groups, the one with Ralph as the leader and the other with Jack as the leader. Their division started when Ralph got mad to Jack for not maintaining the fire, instead went to hunt pigs. Ralph has a point because Jack did not do his duty. If he only did his duty, maybe by the time the helicopter passed through them, they were noticed and rescued. Locke, in his philosophy, would emphasize duty over the rights/privileges because focusing on privileges is so selfish, for the self to benefit alone, while focusing on duty is selfless, for the betterment of all (in relation to politics). Jack was so focused in his rights (right to decide, right of freedom, right to answer the call of nature), wherein he take for granted his duty.
For me, Ralph’s group is that with Lockian perspective while Jack’s group is that with Hobbian perspective. Ralph and Piggy is so positive wherein they still have a hope of being rescued. Jack and his group did not entertain the possibility of being rescued. In Hobbes’s Social-Contract, man enters into a social-contract in order to survive. Man wants to join to a contract to be like that of others within the contract. Some of Ralph’s groupmates transferred to Jack because they have no hope of being rescued and they can feel more security and abundance with Jack’s group (because of hunting).They can feel that Jack’s group is powerful than that of Ralph’s. Ralph and Jack had different ways in running their group. At first, in Ralph’s leadership (when they were still united), all has the right to speak only that one has to use the big shell. The big shell was used to gather them. Whoever holds it has the right to express his views to all. With this kind of leadership, I can say that Ralph’s leadership is democratic. On the other hand, Jack’s leadership is monarchical. Everyone depends in his decision. He is the only one who has a say, who has a command. That is why, in the movie, the twins were only slaves. If they did not Ralph’s group, maybe they are all equal.
Synthesis
To survive is the very basic need of man. He/she should secure his/her survival first before he/she can do other things. If man cannot survive, how can he/she do other things? That is why man has the tendency to be so selfish in his/her hard times in his/her life. Hobbes has a point that somehow man is selfish. Man must secure first his/her self before he/she can offer any help to others. The phrase you cannot give what you don’t have is very true. That is why those who are abundant are the people who are capable of sharing and giving. I also agree to Locke’s view on man’s nature as good. There is a sense of goodness in every human being. That is why, we can also see situations wherein poor people offers help to others who `are in need. We cannot deny the fact that we can feel a “yearning” in is to help if we see anyone who is in need. Even though Hobbes and Locke have different philosophies, they both contain different sides of Truth. Man is bot selfish and good in nature.