tothe Lan. then and onl then can 9 one have sasonable ‘Sapir tones tack. that ease hee is longer Seca bes that sens conuons nr whish people cme Non eae ns section by ecaing 1 een Seley, and reputation, The war sling and sl etptuting mressonble suspiin of oka! bhswiout eas (eexcrncresing spo okeve asooh asain Lies Shays not onl ache y fet, Bt ekg atria ‘mori and sources of welFbsing. AS bo one canbe ste of Stan ay poss fe ni an Fea cea {any long tet eatery pla. People wll spend all heir ‘neon lo cssence sa ging bes, Under sch ‘Sroumanocs there abvotly 90 chance that he ats of ‘SSohee ould foorsh, Our sor ves would be lived wou Ching 10 make them word Locke Iisa mater of whoa debate whether Locke fad Hobbes {yin mind when be motets passage (published i ‘oo ret wow the view of Sit Robert Flimet So) Tic oil target was the (rgshieg3) a dender ofthe done ofthe Divine Rig of {Eepectha the king raed wih auton ante by God sar deny tht, amber of pins, Locke Neri seems toe arguing with Hobs, whose work must have been ‘well kowm im. Arse shall compar sunt of war, Locke Keen to empha tha this mistake Tock supposed tht it woud generally be posible ta vet sceptahe hfe evenin the absence of government Ou question ther wort, hw, aecning to Lake, does Hobbes all a Tet wx start atthe Denning The state of ate, says Lok, is fit a stato perfect reed sco state of equality and "ig bound bya Law of Nate. Verbally court sues juste Hobbes ew but echo hee te clement piven ulte stern interpretation by Locke Hobs’ prince of gua was chim about the mental and physi ipa, of all people. For Lacke its moral clo about ight: mo ‘pets hat natura ight to subordinate any othe, Thi ferton wat exlicly ale aint hoe, icing Fc, ho reepted the fal vw of natural itary headed by 2 Sovecien, ruling by divine appoistment. Fer argued that Goat had appointed Adam ist sverelgo and contemporary Sovereigns eam tac ter lle hack Yo God's inal sae, For Tooke ti selfs that oc natural wiht ae in the sense that no one hasbeen pointed by Cox for this purpose. Althowgh Hos did pote this by hs sumption Sf equality. he woul ascent Looks postion here Hotes ‘ought tht whoever din ac enerabe power over he com unity was, for that eas, tobe ecopned a ie svercign “There however greater dsagementhetwecn the two on the ature and content othe Law of Nate. For Hobbes the Findameniat aw of Notre win to seck east hor ae ‘oi so ut otberwie tote the avantages of war Tha Hobbes’ other eights Laws, were sd to he thcorens of remon” Lace, too, beens the Law af Nature to be Eoverable by remon. ut Locke's Law histological aspect, atnen ip Hove's Laws, The Law, se Locke, tht 9 onecog to harm ane ins Heath hero sesso Frm drs sording to Locke sat whe eve 90 shes ae Tercoe Everyone. undp we acon wily so ye fe remo when hs ov Fen ie aro nti (rod Tea, 60 So i of Nate fo Lk simply he sea a Bice be preserved sh pole So. Locke mk have acer dy ot ohm ors ote sate Me Tice fr lime prpver Sled), ad We Mery sauy toeipem mecan dos wou mst Sens mean mocking te poems Lost’ understand Xampe. although Locke's aw of Nature prevents me from ‘ube he property foe his a senses mation of piece to cnugh to sah Lack cols tat te ae of astute noe vot bea state of war? Clay ts important for [Locke that even in the sate of mature we have mal dt restrict our behaviour. Yet thn on it ow, des ot scm ‘oh t show tit te tate of matte fear ad spon ‘ould mt exst And as Hobbes argues fear and snpcion may te enough forthe state of mtu tote ito war To avoid {his Lcke regres mot oa that he state of mature be subject tanya seer bt iat Souctow or weer people wl Be ‘motivated wo at the Law of Nature struct Thinsugaete strategy for reiting Hotber' psi con ‘osion Hobe apucd that human beings wou be oven by the sare for eet (the continued saaction of ther de Sires). ad ths, at Lat stl lead them ito confit T Hobbes has misdestibed huttan motivation it estan eines say. really are strongly alto thon peace mht ealy be achieve, This would be ane rote Yo Locke's conchason si the route Locke takes? Locke dos ot expat forward {hory of aman motivation inthe To Fens ft seems ‘lear hat be dl not think tht Buin beings woud automat faye mowated to foi the moral hw. tniced he cones ‘ery close to sounding Ike Hobe For the Law of Naare ‘oul eal ther Laws that coneern Men inthis World bein “ain i there were no Body tha lathe State of Nae, had Power to Excate the Law aod thereby presse the noses fad restain efeaders’ (Second Tress 7. p27). In other ord the Law of Nau, hike al lawned a Ines nfs, ‘Without sich an eafrcer it woul be ep Hobbes peietly prepared to sce tht in the sate of ‘ature his Laws of Nature se neti. Unlike Hobbes, how fer Locke cannot accept tat the Law of Nate cou be i ‘alt afte alo Locke’ iw the of God ho pres sy does nothing In vain Tesetore there mst ea my Enforcing the law somehay who hs te power cere But me ae al al inthe state of tue so atone hays power then everjone mast ive Therelore, Lack cosh, there must be a mtu riph, Held by each person, to punch those who oflend aginst the Law of Naar, Each of ts htSau pm effect the sovereign inthe state of Ue with halen, ands the soverig’sbehavioursatoned aot By te laws of the ad but by the Executive Power of the aw ‘oF Natu (in fat we wll sen the ext chapter that Locke bas Sore ost eaten hae The Lay of Nate enforceable, then a numer of other rights cane sesured,evenin he state of mature, For Locks, th mow inportnt of these the rh to eva propery. We cn sry ee mht the has form of the argument ast be here to save, But we wil arve unlese we can rigily ‘oneume objects atch av pls and scorn urthermore, we wll ‘do ete slide ean securely posse plots tad and Febflyexcade other. For then mecan colt tea te secure in our enjoyment of te product (We wl ook a this Srgument in more deal n Chapter 5) To the modern reader, Locke = continval invocation of Go and: Goat porposss may seem an embarrased, Surely i ‘tre alt conser gests of oa piso to natural reson in establishing the premise f hin rp tes even ihe gives ta leser ee So fr example Betis itabeurd. and gaint nara reason, t0 supe that Munn teings my nv make ct ert thou te permsion of tne argument certainly seems plausble, ands some folowers ‘ot Locke have hen prepared drop te helo eri ries of hi iw in vor ofthis tral reason approach tetmoen Habs aad Locke stn tobe that Locket ha, freminthe te of ostne there nfrsesle and effective ‘ocala. backed yo natural gh pute we Hoes would be highly scetie of this nun, We ea age bow Fohber would reply to Lake. According to Hobbes he ‘sparuon and deter future such ats But then the vlsin whomay well bea unreasonable person with ke minded frends ‘ahr ture, ac, with frees united toga revenge. Sich hugs seul oct a powerte sicetie Yo those thinkin nto avoid uaplesantnes im the future do" yet inves Tine So aber woul pobably argue hat even if people di Bake Saunt righ to punish offenders, thie would rarely be RSE with any effet ules a sing, Stable author ene fo ‘SSSic ihn ibe or group an acknowledged leader © Sinistc spurs amd enor jdgements But that woud aes te 2 Reding tt. So i the state of nature even Ihre were aight puns this would be peeve a ames to peace Tomever-there tlle seemingly vital liference between Hos and Locke that Ive ao yet mentioned. Remember thatfor Hobhes oe ofthe key factors that rough people nto onic! was natal cary of gods, Two people wil often ‘Shire the same thing nde wl make hem enemies Locke EUR her Nand. apocars oaks veryiflerent assumption: hte bs phen tings ely. There tra abundance of Ta and plenty of roo for everyone particu the Hist IRresorthe Work when Men were mote danger toe sty ‘inc from thot Company sb the then vas Wider of {he Ear, tant be stained for want of room 0 plan a (Second Frewe, 38.258) Tense, Locke mpi, under {hese conus there very Te eas for eons and ‘ute Met people presumably, would rather utvate ths O¥D site hana the neighbour’, andso we ea expest ela ely peucTa imate fen sources of quarrel. this istight {hen pene i tbe state of tre Seced not oa by the outlay haveto he weeds Tow plant nt? Hotes no doubt wou poin out dst hunter of land does mot rae oat sary of fahed amd SBekuiubc goods. wil offen he far Test trouble to take Spat’ pdt hy sah tha ogo to the efor! of plo esi an haveing, Farther, others have ila ‘hous then 1am wasting my essay by culating yom Ian fo, as Hobbes argued whatever wl pre wil inthe Rand of ots oc Locke to refute Ts he us ete tha amon Feng hate some fats tong motton to Sy the mora law, Otherwise few highly airs das ul vin things fo everyone ato be crt pot fo pa in on foes forthe soul te very cl iexplain why ne ever let and created the sate. The primary fal, Loske aces. th the ann tration of janie ot 30 mich that we wl abbe oer tou, bt that we wl squabble over what jose fquies We Sill inoter wordy drag aout he interpretation fhe La Nature, People wil agree about whether an lenge hat taken place. They mil ogre about is proper punt and opemsation. And they might not have the Fower teach thie be re pata the ate isla powerful source of UputeThis Lacks ss athe pr rmryimonveicne' ofthe stte of ste. The ons hing tat eee ri rhe the ou ha, ea Sh Bot Locke secs the inal abundance of land eventual tar ing to cacy no trough massive popalton prowl bat throug peed andthe ‘Invention’ of money. Por fo the ex, than is nvesary for thr fay’ sural Tf yu grew more than you could use it would simply go to waste. nless you. ‘oul eachonee it for something more permanent. But sistbensuch exchanges becomes and i poe Prodi gone ors: trn ths eae presreon land Stich hen and fr thst ta hake Unk, become scare, Now Locke does nots that such early ntrodaces theHobesian sate of wa, hut he secognizes that once land in Stor suppl and under pute the inconveniences ofthe sate Taishi! goverament. So abou Ie inal pease Rousseau (One way 1 avoid Hobe’ pessimistic concasons abot the tii it we adopted a dferat theory of una ate and rotation Hobbes args that people contin eck fly the power osatsy whatever future dss they may have Thi ‘comin of Seat. dives the argument forthe sate of wa. [Butsuppose Holter was quite wrong, Suppose people naturally snd epontancousl desret lp cae ther whenever they cn. Pethapsimtcad of competing aa rage Tor entene, ha SMAlthough Rousseab does not make these optimistic assump ot the nar goodoess oman Beings hi view takes sbstancal scp inthe deton ike Hobbes and ack he Site for sll preservation. Yet he alo believes that this the ‘hu of the story Habe aod Locke overlooked central aspect Stel te likelihood of oni inthe state of mare. Rowse fies give evident pots of Caton es Row orl esa Rouscu doesnot dow that f modern cizens, moulded and orrapted by stcey, were laced in 9 sate of nate, they ‘rok et just a Hobbes depicted them, But both Hobbs amd /**Rouscu follows tht with scoot aim, When we unde Flsbbesan sate war, andeven some respecte preferable {sore eivlzed condition This des not mean that Rouse is ndvocting rent the sat of nar. for that woul be ‘ton, Ene, gin “Go makes al tings geo an mes with tem and hey besome cv” An hs early sy the i