If you had to choose, do you agree with John Locke or Thomas

Kant

>>7599675
Popper

Porphyry

>>7599676
i dont know who thomas hobbe is but fuck john locke

>>7599785
leviathan!

>>7599782
did he wrote something about "the state" or "society" ?

>>7599794
i assume you mean Porphýrios

>>7599785
what's wrong with john locke?

File: durn to yah.jpg (70KB, 396x594px) Image search: [Google]

70KB, 396x594px

the one and only

File: maxresdefault[1].jpg (81KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 1280x720px

This nigga.

>>7599675
I can't chose, since Hobbes's is already real ontology.

>>7599675
Hobbes tbqhwy

Hobbes

>>7599907
Rawls was and is the cuck of political philosophy.

This is 4chan so it will be mostly Lockeans

Hobbes made more solid foundational points about societal roles, like a European Confucius, and the results are much less of a mixed bag than Locke's focus on property rights for "me me me me me me" which is selfish but understandable

>>7599675
Locke

>>7599907
>be an ignorant buffoon
>"hey, the rest of the world should live like this!"

>>7601392
thank you family. I love seeing people who don't always engage in a Rawls circle jerk view of political philosophy

>>7599675
Rousseau

>>7599675
Hobbes was a bit of a poseur, so, by process of elimination, I'll go with Locke

Both views are wrong but Hobbes was the better of the two.

The State didn't come out of necessity or out of a social contract; it came by force and through armies bought by capital accumulation.

>>7601654
Who invited old Eric Hobsbawm and his old army of angsty Marxist shitposters?

File: image.jpg (105KB, 691x753px) Image search: [Google]

105KB, 691x753px

>>7599907
>School of Life font and backdrop

nitzshy

>>7599675

>treating the state as a necessary evil to be balanced against the individual
>not understanding that laws and customs are essential to the life of the virtuous man

enlightenment pls go

>>7599675
Not Locke. He made up a very convenient argument that natives didn't have any real rights, so it was ok to land grab.

>>7599675
>liberals

>>7599675
Locke

If you want a more obscure social contractualist, to wow the ladys, you can't get wrong with Pfuffendorf.

>>7601845
fuck off

Hobbes is the superior thinker even tho I disapprove of the degree of scientific rationalism present in his thought. His premises are fairly unobjectionable and he introduces a very subtle system. I like to read him along Oakeshottian lines even tho I don't necessarily think it's the best way to understand what Hobbes himself believed.

I'm sympathetic to Locke's conclusions but, like Nozick, once scrutinised he is left with a gaping hole where a serious theory of original appropriation should be. I think the theory of property is where the ultimately arbitrary nature of all political positions is most clearly exposed on both sides - it comes down to bare assertion when you dig deeply enough.

I remember 11th grade history

The answer is obviously Lenin

I share Hobbes' cynicism, so probably him.

Scrap them both and go back to Grotius.