<span>The most basic difference lies in their view of human nature. For Hobbes, humans are eager of power and under the state of nature we tend to kill each other. For this reason, we need a social contract (in order to survive). For Locke, the state of nature is not as pessimistic as Hobbes. We can colaborate, but the problem is in property. Locke wrote something like when we have issues of who is the owner of what (specially under scarcity) we need the social contract protecting our work materialized as property.
I recommend you Hobbes' Leviathan and Locke's Second Treatise of Government. It is everything there and quite clearer than I have tried to explain it.</span>
Answer:
food 14 points woater 15 points seeds 13 points pillow 1 point blanket 1 point letter 5 ponts defnding mechnism 6 points a small home 5points
Explanation:
and a FINAL TOTAL OF 60 WOWOWOWOWOWOW
Answer:
A
Explanation:
The system of checks and balances is perhaps best illustrated through the process by which a bill becomes a law. ... Finally, the judicial branch checks the law-making powers of the executive and legislative branches because it has the power to judge a law to be unconstitutional.
Answer: It is true.
Explanation:Euthyphro's dilemma had a great impact on monotheistic religions. This dilemma until the moment continues to provoke discussions, there are those who are in favor as Platon was and others totally against.
I hope I have helped you. Any question tell me. Good luck!
There was always the possibilities that: Someone would have more than one vote or not vote at all, the voter may not be as anonymous, the vote could not be fully accurate in any way, and in person there would be the less possibility of a fraud then their could through the internet. Hope this helps!
