Answer: Hobbes believed people were naturally selfish and violent.
<u>Further explanation</u>:
Both English philosophers believed there is a "social contract" -- that governments are formed by the will of the people. But their theories on why people want to live under governments were very different.
Thomas Hobbes published his political theory in <em>Leviathan </em> in 1651, following the chaos and destruction of the English Civil War. He saw human beings as naturally suspicious of one another, in competition with each other, and evil toward one another as a result. Forming a government meant giving up personal liberty, but gaining security against what would otherwise be a situation of every person at war with every other person.
John Locke published his <em>Two Treatises on Civil Government </em>in 1690, following the mostly peaceful transition of government power that was the Glorious Revolution in England. Locke believed people are born as blank slates--with no preexisting knowledge or moral leanings. Experience then guides them to the knowledge and the best form of life, and they choose to form governments to make life and society better.
In teaching the difference between Hobbes and Locke, I've often put it this way. If society were playground basketball, Hobbes believed you must have a referee who sets and enforces rules, or else the players will eventually get into heated arguments and bloody fights with one another, because people get nasty in competition that way. Locke believed you could have an enjoyable game of playground basketball without a referee, but a referee makes the game better because then any disputes that come up between players have a fair way of being resolved. Of course, Hobbes and Locke never actually wrote about basketball -- a game not invented until 1891 in America by James Naismith. But it's just an illustration I've used to try to show the difference of ideas between Hobbes and Locke. :-)
Generally speaking, the Euro allows people living in the EU to "<span>a. avoid the inconvenience of converting their currency when entering another EU country," since this was a major "drag" on the economies of many European countries for some time. </span><span />
Justice was not stated in the slogan of the revolution.
It was MOST DEFINITELY D.Mercantilism. DO NOT PUT B!! :)
During his time on the Court, Marshall remained a staunch liberal and stuck to his earlier beliefs on the necessity for the state and federal governments to treat the nation's minorities fairly and justly. In 1991, he announced his retirement. judge summaries
As a committed liberal on the Supreme Court during his time there, Marshall emphasized the necessity for the state and federal governments to treat the nation's minorities fairly and justly. His attempt to create a "sliding scale" interpretation of the equal protection clause, which would weigh the goals of the government against the nature and interests of the groups affected by the law, is the best example of his pragmatic approach. He was a pragmatic judicial activist who was dedicated to making the U.S. Constitution work. The Supreme Court never adopted Marshall's sliding scale, although the Court did share Marshall's opinions in a number of significant civil rights decisions in the 1970s.
Learn more about Federal, here
brainly.com/question/8305583
#SPJ9
