Why humans leave the state of nature to enter into civil society

Why humans leave the state of nature to enter into civil society
Name:
Institution:
Course:
Tutor:
Date:
Why humans leave the state of nature to enter into civil society
Introduction
The state of nature concept in philosophy is used in international law and social contract theory to represent the hypothetical state that people's lives' might have been prior to the existence of civil and communal societies. The presumption that organized societies were preceded by such period of time is what has raised questions regarding how life was like before the rise of civil societies, how nation governments emerged from such initial state, and the reasons for leaving such state to enter to a civil society. Different philosophers have offered similar as well as varying perspectives regarding why people decide to abandon the state of nature and choose to be bound by civil authorities in civil societies. Some of the most notable philosophers who have informed this area include Thomas Hobbes, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, John Locke, Plato, and Glaucon among others. This paper discusses why people leave the state of nature to enter into civil societies by comparing and contrasting the views of Locke and Glaucon. Plato's views of the same matter will also be incorporated as well as a determination of whether he would most support Locke's or Glaucon's views.[John Locke, Two Treatises of Government: By John Locke (Google ebook, 1764), 195.] [Ibid, 197.]
John Locke on the State Of Nature and Civil Society
John Locke is regarded as among the most prominent political and moral philosophers of modern era. His arguments in favor of the social contract, as well as the rights of citizens to go against their rulers, were highly influential on various revolutions that came to pass such as those against Thomas Jefferson. In his book Two Treatises of Government, Locke energetically gives consideration to the concept of the state of nature. He defends the claim that people are by nature equal and free contrary to the popular claim that that God made man naturally subject to political authority. This view is contained in the second of these treatises wherein his justification for a civil society is also contained. Locke's position regarding the state of nature is that it is a state of absolute and perfect liberty to live one's life and conduct one's activities as one desires and sees fit. This in addition is supposed to be in the absence of other peoples' interferences. This however does not mean it is a state that gives one license to do anything that he/she pleases. Though there is no government or civil authority to punish those who transgress against laws, morality does exist in such state and people are bound by it.[Ibid, 197]
Though being pre-political, the state of nature is not, Locke states, pre-moral. In such state people are assumed to be free and equal to one another and therefore capable of being subject to the law of nature. The basis of morality, in Locke's view, is this natural law. It is given to people by God and commands that people do not harm others with respect to their liberties, possessions, life, and health. Because all people equally belong to God, and because no one is supposed to take away what is rightfully God's, persons are prohibited from harming one another. The state of nature is basically therefore a liberty state where people have freedom to carry out and realize their own plans and interests without interference. Because of the natural law, the limitations, and the restrictions that it imposes upon people, such state is relatively peaceful.[Ibid]
Locke therefore implies that the state of nature, contrary to the views of philosophers such as Hobbes, is not an environment of war. It is however capable of devolving into state of violence and war especially during situations of property disputes. Though the state of nature is a state of freedom and liberties where people fully recognize the natural law, and thus do not harm each other, a state of war will begin when a man puts another in a situation of war by attempting to enslave him/her or stealing from him/her. Since there is no civil power in a state of nature for the wronged to appeal, and because natural law allows people to protect their own lives and safeguard their interests, they may opt to kill those who attempt to use force on them. Civil authority is absent in the state of nature and this means that a state of war is likely to go on and on. Locke cites this likelihood as one of the greatest reasons why men choose to leave the state of nature and socially contract together to create a civil society.[Ibid, 206] [Ibid] [John Locke, Two Treatises of Government: By John Locke, 207.]
In Locke's argument regarding the importance of civil society and the establishing contract, property serves a fundamental role. Private property, in Locke's view, is created when man mixes labor with nature's raw materials. It is such property that forms the linchpin of his argument for social contract that establishes a civil society. When men leave the state of nature it is therefore because they are seeking to protect the property they possess.[Ibid, 279.]
Further Locke describes what he terms the “conjugal society” as the condition for the state of nature. Such society is populated by parents with their children. Such societies are moral rather than political and are based on voluntarily agreeing to take care of children together. Locke suggests that a political or civil society is created when various individual men standing for their families unite and agree to give up the punishment powers they possess and hand them over to public power in the form of a government. Such men therefore accept to subject themselves to the wishes of the majority. They form a body known as a government and people can either join it during its formation or after it has already been established.[Ibid, 266.] [John Locke, Two Treatises of Government:By John Locke, 270.]
It is only by way of explicit consent at any stage that people become bound by civil or political authority. According to Locke, the creation of a civil society and government through consent offers men various benefits that they did not have in the state of nature. These major benefits are Laws, officials (judges) to adjudicate the laws, and executive authority necessary for enforcement of the laws. The persons therefore hand over the power, to protect themselves and punish their offenders, to the civil society or government they have created through consent.[Ibid, 331.]
Glaucon on the State of Nature and Civil Society
According to Glaucon the reality of people is that they believe doing wrong is desirable while suffering for such wrongs is undesirable. Since people do not want to suffer the wrongs they do, in Glaucon's view, they engage others in a compromise to create a compact or a social contract so as not to harm each one another. Such compromise is the source of justice in the society. Glaucon thinks that if a person had certainty that an action that results in personal benefit while disadvantaging others would go undiscovered and that there would be no punishment should such actions be discovered, there would be no reason for that individual to act morally.[Allan Bloom, The Republic of Plato: Second edition (Basic Books, 1991), 347.] [Ibid, 17.]
In Glaucon's view, most people categorize justice as among the things that people de...