International+relations+and+the+state+of+nature+essay

toc Do state-of-nature thought experiments (choose either Hobbes or Rousseau’s ideas about the state of nature) have any implications for our understanding of international relations? Does the actual conduct of international relations support or undermine any particular understanding of the state of nature (Rousseau or Hobbes)?

The purpose of this essay is to evaluate the implications of descriptions of the state of nature for international relations. =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 Inequality// and //The State of War//, depending on who you choose to discuss.
 * Do some research on the interpretations of these works. Remember, however, that this research is only supposed to help you understand their texts, not to substitute for reading them; and remember also that scholars differ in their interpretations.
 * Select a thesis, and place it in the introduction of your essay. E.g., Rousseaus' ideas about the state of nature and human evolution away from it imply that international relations are in a constant state of war and that conflict cannot be eliminated.
 * Briefly describe either Rousseau's or Hobbes' views on the state of nature, how we get out of it, and any implications they draw for international relations: what do they say about interstate war and the state of nature? Is war "natural"?
 * Consider more fully the implications of these views: if war is natural, is there any way within Hobbes' (or Rousseau's) theory to eliminate it? If it is unnatural, are there ways of eliminating it? Do their ideas about the state of nature suggest that conflict is inevitable in the state of nature? Do they suggest any mechanisms for eliminating it?
 * Critically assess these views. Should we accept Rousseau's (or Hobbes') view of the state of nature, and the conclusions they draw for international relations? Are any of their assumptions wrong? What would be an accurate assumption if so?