Power: A Force Unseen, a Tool Unequaled - Essay Sample

Introduction

Power definition' differs depending on the person who wields it. However, power can be typically be conceptualized as the potential to exert individual' will depending on a creative approach or a force to keep the status quo, or as a tool to steer revolution. As a conventionally displayed, power is perceived as a brute force or ability that the country can apply in their military arsenal (Bookman 156). Because power can be destructive, constructive, possessed, and held, John Locke's view on the state of nature is the best approach.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Locke's view of power is unique among his nemesis and other great thinkers in the history of his bringing. Born in Pensford city, England, in 1632, he grows to attend Westminster school in 1647, in London. After his learning, he develops a masterpiece concerning "Human understanding," with chapter 21 giving exclusive discussions about power. The way Locke define power in this context is quite unique. Locke defines power to be formed when a person's mind is informed by senses. The person become aware and can reflect the changes that occur inside and those happening externally to the object that relate to the sense. Locke argues that there exists two ways in which a person can perceive power. Locke argues that there exist a power that enable a person to make changes. In another instance, Locke observes the power to change' receiver. The concepts form the notion that Locke has towards power in a simpler context.

Locke's masterpiece of "The Second treatise of Civil Government" expounds more on limited government, consent of the governed, and natural right. Locke argues that one can only understand power by considering the state in which every have at that time. In reality, the state should be of perfect freedom to monitor its activities. In essence, people need to dispose of their possession to enable them to think properly within the context of the law of nature. In this context, people should not be asked to leave or rely on the will of other men.

The other concept is that people should be provided with an equality state where every jurisdiction and power are reciprocal. Equality means that no have more jurisdiction than others without any evidence, but the creatures of the same rank and species. Indiscriminately, the species should be born with the same nature advantage and apply the same faculty without being subjected or subordinated (Bookman 167). However, they can be subjected if the master and the lord of them manifest or declare his will by setting one above others and confer her via a clear appointment and evidence which is undoubted right to freedom and dominion.

Locke postulates that in the state of nature, a person comes by power over the other, but cannot still possess arbitrary and absolute power, to exercise over a criminal he has got committing the crime in his hand based on the passionate heart. In that context, the person shall have act as dictated by conscience and calm reason (Tetlow 222). Such that, the only thing that is proportional to the criminal transgression while serving for his restraint and transgression. A person may harm the other person based on the two concepts mentioned above which are regarded as punishment.

Difference Between Thomas Hobbes and John Locke

Different theories have debated on the theory of power throughout the ages. Thinkers like have expressed their efforts to give their definition of power. However, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke have given contrasting beliefs and viewpoints on the theory of power, but they disagree mostly on the laws of nature and state of nature. The two great thinkers tend to differ in their reasoning of the government. Hobbes believed that a government should stay a life and should be for self-preservation. Locke posits that a government should be structured to preserve liberty, life, and property. Locke and Hobbes start their theories by stating how people are expected to stay in the society based on the state of nature. In this contest, the state of nature is like an arena without overarching law or power to keep the people on track. In any state, a person is needed to be fully in charge since there is no governing body (Blau 21). The government is viewed as an arena with no overarching power or law to keep people in line. In this specific state, the individual is essentially in charge because there is no single governing body. However, both of these thinkers characterize their state of nature a bit differently.

If the law of nature is transgressed, the victim is expected to live on the other rule instead of that of common equity, which complies with the measure God has set to people's actions based on their mutual security (Locke 123). In this context, the offender becomes very dangerous to men. Locke argues that every person has a right to subject anyone to punishment to be considered the law of nature' executioner.

Locke posits that everybody can be stopped from invading the rights of other people. Similarly, people can be stopped from hurting each other by observing the law of nature (Locke 122). According to Locke, the preservation of humanity and peace can be achieved if the law of nature is executed correctly.

Both Hobbes and Locke believe that every civilization, there is a set of life and guideline that people need to follow. All of them believe in having someone in charge and a ruler. However, there are rules that people being governed should observe. The two thinkers specify on how the government should work. All of them believe in Social Contract Theory and Natural Law. In the context of Natural Law, it captures the laws on the pursuit of happiness, liberty, property, and life. Hobbes also believes in the state of nature, where he argues that every humankind typically stays in a constant state where there is war. On the battlefield, the people are subjected to different frauds, simply force, injustices, and no peace. Hobbes posits that people are equal, assuming that in a natural state, things seem to be free. He asserts that everyone has a fair chance of vulnerability, with nobody having the right to ownership of anything. In other words, everything seems to be free, rendering people to have equality to the infinite and endless war. Hence, things that exist in a natural state will be wants, which is highly dominated by power. Thus, it satisfies that power is the most desired and natural thing that makes wants satisfied.

The Social Contract theory views individual political obligations and moral, which rely on the agreement and contract to make a society that people can live viably. Hobbes posits that security is the main agenda behind any political movement. According to him, there is a need for the government to ensure that its citizen's lives are secure. Thus, there ceases to a chance that the people are subjected to vulnerable treatment. Hobbes believes that power is more natural, and everybody wants it because once vested; a person gets a chance to desire. However, wants are numerous, which contribute to a persistent war in nature (Blau 17). Hobbes asserts that power can make people meet their desire for war since the more they get, their wants tend to rise. Thus, people tend to cling on power since they suit their infinite desire and makes them most vigorous. In essence, the more a person gets, the higher they tend to set their expectation. In this context, power makes a person obtain and swap things that realize their wants as it increases.

John Locke and Aristotle

In every society, politician works very hard to persuade citizen to elect them through voting where they render fake promises which is typically common in a political community. If Locke and Aristotle's "nature and purpose of a political community" are compared, a broader political view is displayed. Apart from providing security, the political community focuses on providing the highest good to the citizen which are happiness and virtue. Aristotle argues that the purpose and the nature of the political community is for highest or greater good for every person within the state (Tetlow 231). In essence, Aristotle deem such acts as happiness and virtue. Thus, the objective of having the community is to create a possible way where the citizens realizes happiness and virtue. Aristotle claims that a community comprises many households whose purpose is to meet the citizen's needs apart from daily satisfaction. If a roof needs to be fixed in the community, the carpenter to be hired for the job must be a member. In this instance, power is shared within the community.

On the contrary, Locke seeks to protect specific natural rights, which entails property, liberty, and rights. When discussing engaging in politics and protecting people who own property, Locke tends to exclude people who do not own properties in which at the time were many (Bookman 187). Aristotle tends to create some order to avoid chaos in society to ensure that people are happy and virtuous.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Locke defines power to be formed when a person's mind is informed by senses. The person becomes aware and can reflect the changes that occur inside and those happening externally to the object that relates to the sense. Hobbes also believes in the state of nature, where he argues that every humanity typically stays in a constant state where there is war. On the battlefield, the people are subjected to different frauds, simply force, injustices, and no peace. Hobbes posits that people are equal, assuming that in a natural state, things seem to be free. Locke seeks to protect specific natural rights that entail property, liberty, and rights. Aristotle argues that the purpose and the nature of the political community are for the highest or greater good for every person within the state. Locke argues that every person has a right to subject anyone to punishment to be considered the law of nature' executioner.

Works Cited

Blau, Adrian. "Hobbes's Practical Politics: Political, Sociological and Economistic Ways of Avoiding a State of Nature." Hobbes Studies, 2019, pp. 1-26.

Bookman, John T. "The Second Treatise." A Reader's Companion to The Prince, Leviathan, and the Second Treatise, 2018, pp. 139-204.

Locke, John. "19. The Second Treatise of Government." Democracy, 2016, pp. 120-123.

Tetlow, Joanne. "Locke's Political Theology and the 'Second Treatise'." Locke Studies, vol. 17, 2018, pp. 197-232.