Artwork

Contenu fourni par Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey. Tout le contenu du podcast, y compris les épisodes, les graphiques et les descriptions de podcast, est téléchargé et fourni directement par Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey ou son partenaire de plateforme de podcast. Si vous pensez que quelqu'un utilise votre œuvre protégée sans votre autorisation, vous pouvez suivre le processus décrit ici https://fr.player.fm/legal.
Player FM - Application Podcast
Mettez-vous hors ligne avec l'application Player FM !

The Great Debate Between Hobbes and Locke Finally Settled?

1:04:36
 
Partager
 

Manage episode 169920074 series 114681
Contenu fourni par Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey. Tout le contenu du podcast, y compris les épisodes, les graphiques et les descriptions de podcast, est téléchargé et fourni directement par Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey ou son partenaire de plateforme de podcast. Si vous pensez que quelqu'un utilise votre œuvre protégée sans votre autorisation, vous pouvez suivre le processus décrit ici https://fr.player.fm/legal.

While Hobbes and Locke are two of the most important thinkers of Modern, Liberal Political Philosophy, they had radically different views about the best sort of regime human beings could create through the Social Contract. According to Hobbes's pessimistic view of human nature, he believed individuals were too vainglorious and ambitious to create, and participate in, a representative democracy. Only an all-powerful authoritarian ruler would be able to keep the citizens in line and the state stable and secure. Locke took a different approach. Individually and passionately opposed to any form of monarchy or centralized power, Locke argued that individuals were more reasonable than Hobbes thought, and the civil institutions of society more deeply grounded. Human beings could, Locke argued, create a democratic form of government with limited power, and sustain the enterprise over time. As we know, Locke seems to have one the debate, but recent socio-cultural and political events may prove Hobbes right.

  continue reading

90 episodes

Artwork
iconPartager
 
Manage episode 169920074 series 114681
Contenu fourni par Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey. Tout le contenu du podcast, y compris les épisodes, les graphiques et les descriptions de podcast, est téléchargé et fourni directement par Walker Uhl and Nick Dungey ou son partenaire de plateforme de podcast. Si vous pensez que quelqu'un utilise votre œuvre protégée sans votre autorisation, vous pouvez suivre le processus décrit ici https://fr.player.fm/legal.

While Hobbes and Locke are two of the most important thinkers of Modern, Liberal Political Philosophy, they had radically different views about the best sort of regime human beings could create through the Social Contract. According to Hobbes's pessimistic view of human nature, he believed individuals were too vainglorious and ambitious to create, and participate in, a representative democracy. Only an all-powerful authoritarian ruler would be able to keep the citizens in line and the state stable and secure. Locke took a different approach. Individually and passionately opposed to any form of monarchy or centralized power, Locke argued that individuals were more reasonable than Hobbes thought, and the civil institutions of society more deeply grounded. Human beings could, Locke argued, create a democratic form of government with limited power, and sustain the enterprise over time. As we know, Locke seems to have one the debate, but recent socio-cultural and political events may prove Hobbes right.

  continue reading

90 episodes

Tous les épisodes

×
 
Loading …

Bienvenue sur Lecteur FM!

Lecteur FM recherche sur Internet des podcasts de haute qualité que vous pourrez apprécier dès maintenant. C'est la meilleure application de podcast et fonctionne sur Android, iPhone et le Web. Inscrivez-vous pour synchroniser les abonnements sur tous les appareils.

 

Guide de référence rapide