Compare the "State of Nature" theories of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke. Does Wolff’s analysis suggest we have a moral obligation to obey the state? 1. Introduction
Describe Hobbes’s view of a "war of all against all," where life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" due to scarcity and fear. Introduction to Political Philosophy- Jonathan ...
Contrast this with Locke’s view, where a moral law exists even without a government, but "inconveniences" (like the lack of an impartial judge) eventually make the State of Nature untenable. 3. Justifying the State Compare the "State of Nature" theories of Thomas
Reflect on Wolff’s "Final Word," which suggests that even without a single perfect answer, the act of political philosophizing is essential for navigating modern issues like global justice and equality. Other Potential Essay Topics from the Book Introduction Describe Hobbes’s view of a "war of
While Hobbes and Locke offer vastly different visions of human life without government (the "State of Nature"), both ultimately conclude that a centralized state is necessary to ensure human flourishing, though they differ on the legitimate extent of that state's power. 2. The State of Nature: Hobbes vs. Locke
If you'd prefer a different focus, you can use these themes from Jonathan Wolff's work : An Introduction to Political Philosophy by Jonathan Wolff
Mention a common critique Wolff explores—that pure utilitarianism might allow for the sacrifice of innocent individuals for the "greater good". 5. Conclusion