Thomas Hobbes vs John Locke vs Jeremy Bentham
Hobbes, Locke, and Bentham are the three foundational figures of the English political tradition, spanning the seventeenth, late seventeenth, and late eighteenth centuries. The lineage moves from Hobbes's absolute sovereign through Locke's limited government to Bentham's reformist utilitarianism, and reading them in sequence shows the gradual displacement of natural-law contractarianism by calculative utilitarianism in Anglo-American political thought.
Key differences at a glance
| Thomas Hobbes | John Locke | Jeremy Bentham | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ground of legitimacy | Contract creating an absolute sovereign for security. | Contract under natural law; protection of pre-political rights. | Principle of utility: greatest happiness of the greatest number. |
| Status of natural rights | Surrendered (except self-preservation) to the sovereign. | Pre-political and inalienable; ground for resistance. | Nonsense upon stilts; rejected as a basis for politics. |
| Standard of evaluation | Avoidance of civil war and the war of all against all. | Protection of life, liberty, and property under natural law. | Aggregate welfare measured by the felicific calculus. |
| Relation to reform | Conservative: even bad sovereigns are preferable to civil war. | Reformist: government may be revoked when trust is broken. | Reformist: institutions reshaped to maximize utility. |
Biographical facts
| Thomas Hobbes | John Locke | Jeremy Bentham | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Dates | 1588 – 1679 | 1632 – 1704 | 1748 – 1832 |
| Nationality | English | English | English |
| Era | Modern | Modern | Modern |
| Profile | Thomas Hobbes → | John Locke → | Jeremy Bentham → |
Where they agree
All three rejected the theological grounding of political authority in favor of a rational reconstruction from human psychology and interests, all three took the avoidance of arbitrary rule as a central political problem, and all three believed that political institutions must be evaluated by reference to a clear standard rather than by inherited custom alone.
Where they disagree
The disagreements concern what grounds political legitimacy. Hobbes derives it from the social contract by which individuals surrender nearly all rights to an absolute sovereign in exchange for security; the standard is the avoidance of civil war. Locke derives it from a contract that authorizes only limited government acting under the natural law, with property and rights existing prior to political society; the standard is the protection of natural rights. Bentham rejects natural rights as nonsense upon stilts and derives political evaluation directly from the principle of utility: institutions are to be judged by their tendency to produce the greatest happiness of the greatest number.
Representative quotes
Thomas Hobbes
-
“The war of all against all.”
The First Part, Chapter 13, p. 62 -
“Curiosity is the lust of the mind.”
The First Part, Chapter 6, p. 26 -
“Fear of things invisible is the natural seed of that which everyone in himself calleth religion.”
The First Part, Chapter 11, p. 51
John Locke
-
“No man's knowledge here can go beyond his experience.”
Book II, Ch. 1, sec. 19 -
“All mankind being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions.”
Second Treatise of Government , Ch. II, sec. 6 -
“The end of law is not to abolish or restrain, but to preserve and enlarge freedom.”
Second Treatise of Government , Ch. VI, sec. 57
Jeremy Bentham
-
“Priestley was the first (unless it was Beccaria ) who taught my lips to pronounce this sacred truth — that the greatest happiness of the greatest number is the foundation of morals and legislation.”
Extracts from Bentham's Commonplace Book", in Collected Works , x, p. 142; He credits Priestley in his Essay on the First Principles of Government (1768) or Beccaria with inspiring his use of the phrase, often paraphrased as " The greatest good for the greatest number ", but the statement "the greatest happiness for the greatest number" actually originates with Francis Hutcheson , in his Inquiry c -
“Create all the happiness you are able to create: remove all the misery you are able to remove. Every day will allow you to add something to the pleasure of others, or to diminish something of their pains . And for every grain of enjoyment you sow in the bosom of another, you shall find a harvest in your own bosom; while every sorrow which you pluck out from the thoughts and feelings of a fellow creature shall be replaced by beautiful peace and joy in the sanctuary of your soul .”
Advice to a young girl (22 June 1830) -
“Advice to a young girl (22 June 1830)”
Create all the happiness you are able to create: remove all the misery you are able to remove. Every day will allow you to add something to the pleasure of others, or to diminish something of their pains . And for every grain of enjoyment you sow in the bosom of another, you shall find a harvest in your own bosom; while every sorrow which you pluck out from the thoughts and feelings of a fellow cr
Pairwise comparisons
Continue reading
- Full profile: Thomas Hobbes
- Full profile: John Locke
- Full profile: Jeremy Bentham
- Browse all philosopher comparisons