Purpose+of+state-of-nature+reasoning+essay

toc What is the purpose of state-of-nature reasoning? Drawing on either Hobbes and Rousseau, discuss the purpose of engaging in state-of-nature thought experiments. What do Hobbes or Rousseau hope to gain by such speculation? Critically assess their arguments: would the "state of nature" be like Hobbes (or Rousseau) describe it? Would a more accurate description of the state of nature have different political implications?

The purpose of this essay is to figure out how descriptions of the state of nature have political implications. =Instructions= =Resources= include page="Hobbes Bibliography" editable="true" include page="Rousseau Bibliography" editable="true"
 * Read the assigned chapters of Hobbes' //Leviathan// or Rousseau's //Discourse on the Origins of Inequality//. (Focus on only one of the two thinkers).
 * Do some research about the interpretations of those works. This research is intended to help you interpret the texts themselves; it should not be used as a substitute for reading the texts and engaging with their arguments. Note also that scholars differ in their interpretations.
 * Decide on a thesis. For example, you might think that state-of-nature reasoning is intended to establish historical truths (e.g., Rousseau believed that this is likely what happened in the distant past) or not; or that such reasoning is supposed to help establish the nature of our political obligations; or that such reasoning is intended to establish what our natural desires are; or to make a point in some contemporary political controversy; or something of the sort. What are the political implications of their state of nature descriptions?
 * Consider how Rousseau or Hobbes use a description of the state of nature to accomplish that purpose, using citations to their work. What do they emphasize? What are the political implications of their descriptions? Does their particular description of the state of nature justify any particular kind of political regime, approaches to conflict, etc? Ground your arguments in their texts.
 * Critically assess their arguments: are their assumptions about human equality correct? Are their assumptions about human desires and rationality accurate? Consider also potential responses: how would Hobbes (or Rousseau) respond?
 * Consider how a different description of the state of nature (e.g., your own) might have different political implications.