The state of nature refers to the perception used in political philosophy, morals, social contract and religious theories that are essential in the formulation of international law. The concept is crucial in indicating the theoretical conditions of the lives of human beings before the societies started to exist. Various philosophers involved in the theory of the state of nature usually assume that was a period whereby societies used to exist without any social order thus coming up with the question about how life used to be in that period. In some accounts of the theory of social contract, there are no human rights involved since freedom dominates together with the indenture that creates obligations and rights(Showalter, 2016).
However, in some editions, the contract usually impose restrictions on individuals who tend to curtail the natural rights of human beings(Hobbes, 2018).Societies that exist without any political state are studied in the contemporary situation in a field like paleolithic history in addition to anthropological fields such as archaeology, social and cultural anthropology as well as ethnology in investigating power related and social structures of native and uncontacted people that live within tribal communities.
Philosophers Contribution towards the theory
Mozi
Mozi happens to be a philosopher who came from the ancient Warring state who was among the first thinkers living in the old China. He developed an ultimate state of nature which acted as premises of defending the urge of a single ruler in every state. According to Mozi, the state of every individual consisted of their personal morals and as a result, individuals were unable to arrive at a consensus causing a waste of resources(Groussot, 2013). His philosophy promoted the actions which lead to the benefit of an individual state although such natural association was typically rejected by the leader of that period.
According to Mozi, the commencement of human life in a situation without governments or law, the tradition was to consider everyone according to their morals with each individual holding their own morals. Therefore, two individuals have two different ethics whereby in a family situation, a father was morally different to his children which in turn resulted in being estranged since they were unable to reach a consensus. Every individual worked for their own benefit using fire, water or poison with the surplus energy not being spent for reciprocated assistance with the extra goods produced ending up in waste since there was no sharing. Excellent teachings were secretly kept and as a result, Mozi proposed to unify the morals to fit in a single standard which can be comfortably used by any individual by calculating the benefits of every act(Showalter, 2016). Through his proposal, every individual in the state which includes the leader together with his subjects would have shared morals, joint efforts as well as cooperation while authority is being exercised. His suggestion was eventually faced by a strong opposition which came from the cunficians particularly Mencius since they preferred benefits over ethics.
Thomas Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes was one of the human rights advocates who came from Malmesbury, England being born in 1588 April and died on 1679 December. He was a philosopher of English who is typically viewed as one of the initiators of the current opinionated philosophy. Hobbes is well recognized for his scholarly work known as Leviathan which instituted the theory of social contract which was very crucial in the founding the western political attitude(Hobbes, 2018). Though on coherent foundations a campaigner of totalitarianism for the autonomous, Hobbes also formulated a number of the essentials of European enlightened thought which entailed the right of the human being, the expected impartiality of all individuals, the synthetic nature of the opinionated order which in turn led to the eventual peculiarity between the universal civilization and the federal state, the scrutiny that all justifiable political power was supposed to be delegate based on the approval of the people.
Additionally, he formulated a liberal explanation of law which leaves the public free to do anything the law does not unambiguously forbid(Hobbes, 2018). His indulgent of humans as being subject and motion, observing the same corporeal laws like other motions and subjects, remains significant. His description of human scenery being self-interested collaboration together with the political communities being centered upon a communal contract that is still considered one of the main themes in political philosophy. According to Hobbes, the wholesome state of nature or rather the natural situation of mankind was deduced from the Leviathan together with his ancient work concerning the citizen whereby he argued that individuals are typically equal through nature in faculties of the mind and body as a whole.
John Locke
John Locke typically considered the state of nature in his dissertation about the civil government which was documented during the Exclusion crisis period in England in 1680s. According to him, the condition of nature among all individuals is a free entity whereby they are responsible for their actions in addition to their disposal of thing they typically posses since their thinking is considered fit within all the bounds of the natural law(Groussot, 2013). The nature situation is governed by the law derived from nature which is alleged to be the reason. Locke believed that every reason had a teaching that no individual was supposed to harm another throughout their lifetime since there was liberty among themselves which in turn acted as property safety with the transgression being punished accordingly. He described the state of nature together with the civil society being opposite from one another with the need for a universal society coming in as part of the perpetual existence in the condition of nature. His view on the situation of nature was partially derived from Christianity beliefs which differ with Hobbes perspective whose attitude did not depend on any preceding theology.
Despite the criticism of Hobbes ideology, Locke never mentioned his name and instead, he responded to other philosophical writers who existed during his era among them being Robert Filmer. Locke’s initial treatise was mainly a response towards the Patriacha done by Filmer whereby he followed a procedure to refute the theory put across in Filmers work. The conservative party which existed during that period had united behind the Patriacha while the Whigs, on the other hand, scared other prosecutions that were being used by the Protestants as the Anglican believers who were strongly behind the two dissertations of government that had been put across by Locke(Showalter, 2016). This gave a clear theory concerning the reason why individuals would be defensible in overthrowing a dominion which abused the trust that the public had placed in it.
Baruch Spinoza
Baruch Spinoza was a Dutch philosopher who had a Portuguese origin since he was born in Benedito de Espinosa in November 1632 and died on 1677 February.He was responsible for laying the foundation for the 18th-century illumination and contemporary biblical condemnation, including modern beginnings of the self as well as the universe and as a result, he eventually came to be deemed as one of the grand rationalists in the philosophy of the 17th-century(Yakira, 2015). Along with René Descartes, Spinoza was an important philosophical stature of the Golden Age in Dutch history.
Spinoza strongly believed in the philosophy of broadmindedness as well as benevolence and essentially lived the lifestyle that he used to preach. He was condemned and ridicule throughout his lifetime and later on he was alleged to teach atheism. However, even his critiques had to acknowledge the fact that he lived a pious life. Besides the spiritual controversies, nobody actually had much negativity about Spinoza since he occasionally enjoyed watching spiders hunting flies.(Yakira, 2015) The Amsterdam metropolitan authorities barred Spinoza from visiting Amsterdam in response to the petitions of rabbis in addition to the Calvinist clergy, who was vicariously affronted by the subsistence of a liberal thinker in the synagogue. He spent a short time in a nearby the village known as Ouderkerk aan de Amstel, although got back soon after that to Amsterdam where he lived quietly for a number of years, giving secretive philosophy education and pulverizing lenses before he left the city in the period between 1660 up to 1661.
During his reign in Amsterdam, Spinoza documented his Short dissertation about God, Man together with His Well-Being which he did not publish during his lifetime since he assumed that with the superior reason it could get suppressed. Two Dutch conversions of it survived and were later discovered around 1810.Spinoza migrated in 1661 from Amsterdam heading to Rijnsburg which was the center of operations for the Collegiants(Yakira, 2015). While in Rijnsburg, he started work that focused on his Descartes ideology of Philosophy together with his masterpiece known as the Ethics. In 1663, he briefly returned to Amsterdam where he was able to finish and eventually published his Descartes Principles of Philosophy which was the only work that ever got published throughout his lifetime bearing his name.He later moved from Amsterdam the same year and relocated Voorburg.
Spinoza shared moral beliefs with antique Epicureans in forsaking ethics past the material world even though Epicureans paid attention to physical pleasure while Spinoza focused on emotional comfort. Encapsulated at the beginning of his exposition on the enhancement of the thoughtful Tractatus de intellectus emendatione is the center of Spinoza's moral philosophy, what he alleged to be the factual and ultimate good. Spinoza viewed the good and evil as relative concepts whereby he claimed that nonentity is fundamentally good or bad apart from relativity to an idiosyncrasy(Yakira, 2015). Things that had characteristically been viewed seen as good or evil were argued by Spinoza whereby he stated that they were either basically good or awful for humans. Spinoza believed in a deterministic world in which all the things in it had nature which proceeds from the certain obligation which takes place through the paramount perfection. According to Spinoza, nothing takes place by chance in the entire world in addition to the fact that nothing is conditional.
Jean Jacques Rousseau
Jean Jacques Rousseau was born in June 1712 in Geneva and died in July 1778 having been a successful philosopher, composer as well as a writer who was very active in France throughout the 18th century(Showalter, 2016). His opinionated philosophy inclined the illumination across the entire European continent in addition to various aspects that were involved in the French Revolution together with the overall growth of contemporary political and edifying thought.
He had a similarity with other philosophers who operated during that period whereby, Rousseau viewed to the theoretical situation of Nature as a guiding principle.He openly condemned Hobbes for his allegations that stated that man being utter of nature he typically has no initiative of goodness which makes him be naturally wicked.Rousseau also criticized the thought put across by Hobbes which states that a man ferocious being since he does not recognize the virtue. On the divergence, Rousseau stated that uncorrupted ethics usually prevailed in the situation of nature thus being praised for the commendable temperance of the Caribbeans while expressing the sexual need despite living in a hot typical weather, which constantly seems to arouse the passions(Showalter, 2016).
Rousseau declares that the phase of human improvement allied with what he termed as savages were paramount or optimal throughout human development which takes place amid the most favorable brute animals.On the one hand, there is intense decadent civilization thus the perception of various environmentalists in the current world can be tracked down to Rousseau who alleged that the more deviation in men from the situation of nature, the shoddier they would eventually become(Showalter, 2016). Taking up the conviction that all disintegrates found in the hands of men, Rousseau stated that men were supposed to be free, good and wise in the condition of nature with instinct together with emotion when they are not imprecise due to unnatural restrictions of civilization which act as the instructions and voices of nature to the good.
Rousseau argued that the unique, deeply blemished Social indenture that was tinted by Hobbes that resulted to the current state was complete at the implication of the rich and influential, who hoaxed the common population into conceding their freedom to them and in turn introduce dissimilarity as a basic feature prevalent in the human society. Rousseau's origin of the Social Contract is understood as an option to this deceptive form of connection. (Showalter, 2016) By the end of Discourse on Inequality, he clarifies how the craving to have worth in the eyes of other individuals leads to undermining personal reliability and legitimacy in a society manifested by interdependence. In the closing chapter, Rousseau gave solution whereby he stated that all men could take part in cultivating virtue among them and surrendering to their legitimate rulers.
The Social Contract delineates the basis for a lawful political order inside a framework of typical republicanism. It developed ideas revealed in a previous article known as Discourse on Political Economy. The dissertation commences with the theatrical opening lines stating that Man is usually born free although he is usually in chains everywhere. Those who imagine themselves as masters are certainly greater slaves.(Showalter, 2016).Rousseau asserts that the condition of nature was a prehistoric condition with no morality or law which man left behind for the reimbursement and requirement of teamwork. As humanity developed, the dissection of labor and classified property needed a man to assume institutions of the decree. In the disintegrated stage of society, man is likely to be in recurrent antagonism with his associates while becoming ever more dependent thus doubling pressure which threatens his survival as well as freedom.
The Relation of Fairness, Peace, Equality and Liberty concepts
Equality in its own prescriptive usage usually has a close association with morality as well as justice in universal and distributive fairness in particular. Equality is typically considered a productive feature while exercising justice in history whereby people, as well as emancipatory movements, utilize the justice language to pillory various inequalities in the society. The correct account and role of equality are defined as an issue which is crucial to the social justice issue despite being a difficult issue in philosophy(Groussot, 2013). Philosophers have justified a variety of opinions together with conceptions involved in equality whereby a large number of them mention it throughout their discussions.
Through the connection of equality with justice, there are different descriptions which are applied while trying to bring out the real connection between the concepts. There are various activities, individuals, circumstances as well as institutions which are involved in illustrating the connections. The objects of fairness usually stand in an interior connection with an order being involved on various hints of the association. Justice is mainly applicable while conducting voluntary deeds which implies that the responsibility of under question has been addressed and as a result, fairness is basically related to the actions of every individual with people being the initial bearers of ethical individualism responsibilities(Showalter, 2016). Individuals are supposed to take responsibility for their actions with the circumstances anticipated to change through the omissions and such actions. There is usually a moral difference between injustices mainly due to the unfair treatment which is evident through collective deeds or an individual because of a failure in collecting the unfair circumstances. The people’s responsibility in treating other individuals fairly and equally is morally affected by the appropriateness and liberty that results from the priority placed on the moral duties to ensure fairness through equalization.
When two individuals have equal status in one or more relevant normal respect, they are supposed to be treated in an equal manner based on the concept of fairness. This turns out to be the formally accepted principle of equality which was formulated by Aristotle with reference to Plato whereby similar cases are supposed to be treated in a similar manner. Some philosophers usually view the formal concept of equality as a precise application of the rationality rule since it is inconsistent to treat cases that are equal in an unequal manner without adequate reasons(Hobbes, 2018). Most philosophers usually describe liberty through stressing that the current case at stake should be a moral justice principle that basically corresponds to the acknowledgment of universal and impartial nature of moral judgments. In conclusion, the philosophers played a great role in trying to define human rights using their conception as well as incorporating other social perspectives in order to come up with an efficient description that is being used in the present day. Their main aim was to bring out equality in mankind thus ensuring that the world becomes a better place for every individual.
References
Groussot, X. (2013). The European human rights culture a paradox of human rights protection in Europe? Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.
Hobbes, T. (2018). Leviathan. Mineola, New York: Dover Publications, Inc.
Showalter, E. (2016). Madame de Graffigny and Rousseau: between the two discours. Oxford: Voltaire Foundation.
Yakira, E. (2015). Spinoza and the case for philosophy. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
