Many philosophers have taken special interest in examining the condition of human beings outside of the influence of civilization. They have stripped this situation down into what they termed a “state of human nature”. However, from this point, the theorists’ views have separated into different perceptions of how the “basic” human being would behave and act prior to the development of society, state, and laws. Thomas Hobbes and John Locke have provided influential in-depth explanations as to the circumstances of human nature that describe a human being as antagonistic individual who is required to have a sovereign govern over him so as to not inflict violence or intrude on another’s rights or property. On the contrary, Jean-Jacques Rousseau offered a radically different analysis from the previous theorists’ conceptions by strongly arguing that the “savage man” is much more content than the civil man in which there is no need to cease being in this particular condition.
Thomas Hobbes was a very significant philosopher, who had lived his entire life in fear. This fear he possessed was quite evident in one of his works, Leviathan, where he provided a depiction of a sovereign commonwealth whose purpose was to preserve peace and prevent human beings from submitting to a state of all against all. In this particular piece of work, Hobbes was incredibly detailed on his notion of a human being. He made the argument that every part of the human body is matter in motion, in which this continuation of movement is responsible for the development of thoughts or imagination due to the human sense apparatus setting off cycles of new motions (8). Another product of the perpetual activity and interaction of matter is appetites and aversions that is what comprises the individual (28). ...