CSS Solved Political Science 2021 Past Paper | Rousseau’s Notion of The State of Nature
The following question is attempted by Miss Dr. Shumaila Parveen, the top scorer in CSS Political Science papers. Moreover, the answer is written on the same pattern, taught by Sir to his students, scoring the highest marks in compulsory subjects for years. This solved past paper question is uploaded to help aspirants understand how to crack a topic or question, how to write relevantly, what coherence is, and how to include and connect ideas, opinions, and suggestions to score the maximum.
Question breakdown
The answer to the question requires a thorough introduction to the topic, and afterwards, a brief apprehension of the state of nature is necessary to understand the main query of the question. Additionally, providing a terse circumstantial condition that spreads the grounds for the concept, the State of Nature, is a must-step. Then a detailed note to differentiate the State of Nature of Rousseau, Thomas Hobbes, and Locke would help the students to get quality marks, finally, the answer would wrap up by adding final thoughts.
Outline
1-Introduction
Political thinkers, such as J. J Rousseau, Thomas Hobbes, and John Locke, elucidated the formation of human society and defined the pre-existing state of humans before societal existence, the state of nature. These theorists explained the state of nature, the importance of a society, and a government structure to realize the interests of people, even so, there are multipronged differences in their views about the state of nature.
2-Understanding the “State of Nature”
3-Circumstantial Apprehension of the Notion
- ✓Excessive disagreement between subjects and the sovereign
- ✓Conflicts among monarchs and religious identities
- ✓The Parliamentary supremacy
4-Differentiating the State of Nature of Rousseau, Hobbes, and Locke
- ✓Human nature in the state of nature
- ✓Features of the state of nature
- ✓Stimulants of social contract
5-Critical Analysis
6-Conclusion
Answer to the question
Introduction
Contemporary human society is built on constitutional supremacy and fundamental rights, with piles of chronicles depicting the continuous struggle of people to secure their interests. In this regard, many political philosophers gave various explanations for the formation of society, its major stimuli, and the state of men before society. Political thinkers, such as J. J Rousseau, Thomas Hobbes, and John Locke, elucidated the formation of human society and defined the pre-existing state of humans before societal existence, the state of nature. Nonetheless, these theorists explained the state of nature, the importance of a society, and a government structure to realize the interests of people; there are multipronged differences in their views about the state of nature. Hence, the societal arrangements of these philosophers presented a multi-directional understanding of how human society has evolved through numerous expeditions in politics, economics, cultures, and traditions.
Understanding the “state of nature”
The term “state of nature” has been used to apprehend the law of nature, human behaviours, the evils and the good of people, and reasons that compelled the inhabitants of the same areas to form a society and let go of their natural rights and arbitrary authority. To simplify the statement, the law of nature depicts the power, rights, and authority of man to be self-governed while observing other’s rights before the existence of society, which is governed by a monarch or aristocrats or parliament. Moreover, human conduct towards each other in the state of nature and the natural impetus to secure their life and belongings while avoiding as many injuries as possible are the particular characteristics of the state of nature. But, here, Thomas Hobbes gave a quite contrasting explanation to that of Rousseau and John Locke.
Circumstantial Apprehension of the notion
The time, as well as the political environment, the family role, and religious affinities, have substantially influenced the political philosophies of theorists, namely Rousseau, John Locke, and Thomas Hobbes. Jean Jacques Rosseau meticulously observed the flaws of the then society, the elite ideologies, and parliamentary and sovereign errors and chalked his theory, including the thesis on the state of nature. Similarly, Thomas Hobbes observed the political chaos of England during his life span, particularly the execution of the monarch, Charles I, the Cromwell protectorate state, the military rulership of Christian Puritans, the religious and economic differences, and the ever-increasing authority of the parliament. Thus, to profoundly explain the importance of government and a king before the general public, Thomas drew an imaginary society that was lawless, moral-less, and an utter curse to the existence of human life and his property, naming it the state of nature. The political circumstances of England during Locke’s life did not change from that of Thomas; the Civil War of the 1640s in England, the general public dissatisfaction with the king, the protests for civil rights, the religious conflicts, and the parliamentary sovereignty itched Locke to great length. However, the state of nature that Locke presented has antagonizing characteristics to the state of nature assessed by Thomas Hobbes.
Differentiating the state of nature of Rousseau, Hobbes, and Locke
Rousseau’s theory contains some similarities to the state of nature described by John Locke in his study, The Second Treatise-the Nature of Man and the State of Nature. However, Thomas Hobbes, a stern follower of the monarch of England, demonstrated his political philosophy in favour of the king and the establishment of “Leviathan,” his literary work, to provide the importance of government.
- ✓Human nature in the state of nature
Attending the natural man in the state of nature, Rousseau said the natural man was un-corrupted by the vices and luxuries of civilized living; in contrast to the present man, he was not preoccupied with material values. Rousseau asserted that the natural man had more faith, patriotism, and citizenship. In a state of nature, the man may be belligerent and abusive, but this does not create the relation of master and slave. While describing the state of men in the state of nature, Thomas Hobbes thought that the controlling factor in human life is an inner vigour that pushes man to satisfy his self-interests, especially to avoid injuries. Hobbes, like Jeremy Bentham, concluded that there are two driving forces in a man’s life: good and evil. Anything he hates is deemed “evil or aversion” and is undesirable; furthermore, the things desirable to man are known as “good.” In consequence, man wants to be sure of his life and possessions, and for the same cause, man seeks power. This gave a man a characteristic of “selfishness”, wanting unlimited power to secure his life and property at the expense of others’ lives and assets. As Hobbes states, by nature, a man is individualistic, self-seeking, appalling, and competitive to the point of combativeness. For him, the equality and freedom of men in the state of nature caused a condition of perpetual war among men. Nonetheless, that was not true for Locke; his state of nature possesses the law of nature, where men, being rational, though not perfect, maintained a state of equality. Every person had full authority over his life and possessions, but this does not mean the natural man was combative and quarrelsome.
- ✓Features of the state of nature
In addition, realizing the scheme of the state of nature, J. J. Rousseau, unlike Thomas Hobbes, asserted that the inequalities, perpetual wars, and governmental dominance over the people are not the product of the state of nature but they are purely bred in the civil society where inequalities in property holdings were the main causes of the present class differences. The state of nature was not a state of war, nor it suppressed the rights, liberties, and interests of people. Furthermore, Locke’s discourse over the state of nature is found in his literary work, Second Treaty – the Nature of Man and the State of Nature. He argued that the state of nature was not a utopian condition, nor was it a state of war, and that natural man, being rational and having the law of nature, assumed equality and liberty in the state of nature. Moreover, no one, in the state of nature, ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, and possessions. Rousseau, in his famous work Leviathan, wrote that by nature, a man is individualistic, self-seeking, appalling, and competitive to the point of combativeness, having intentions to preserve his interests. In consequence, in the state of nature, war is perpetual, and men are in a constant state of conflict.
- ✓Stimulants of social contract
For Hobbes, the state of nature is a condition of utter dispute and anarchy, where there is no place for industry, growth, culture, merchandise, transportation facilities, and knowledge. Moreover, a continuous fear of the loss of life and possessions engulfs the importance of society, art, and time. Additionally, man is not the master of his fate, Thomas stated, so he acts upon certain accords, sets moral values, and lives peacefully on the grounds of these agreements and moral principles called society. Unlike Thomas Hobbes, Locke deemed that though men were already enjoying liberty and equality, the chances to improve their circumstances were possible. Locke highlighted three errors in the state of nature that compel men to form a society. First, the natural man having equal authority may suppress the rights and interests of others to secure his interest. Thus, a supreme authority was necessary to safeguard the rights and interests of all men. Second, the state of nature demanded the existence of an indifferent judge to settle disputes. Finally, in the state of nature, there was no executive authority to enforce the law of nature, agreements, and judgments. Hence, mankind, to resolve the ill conditions, has decided to build a society, entrusting its security to a representative government. Nonetheless, Rousseau gave a distinct view there were two motivations in the natural man: self-love or love to preserve his life and possessions and compassion towards one’s associations. Thus, to pursue later, man suppressed the prior forces and established a society.
Critical analysis
The critique usually builds on the philosophy of Rousseau’s state of nature’s description, how the forces or motivations in the state of nature contributed to forming a society, and how an individualist isolated natural man developed associations. Rousseau’s notion of the characteristics of the natural man grabbed wide criticism, arguing that man is not selfish and brutal in nature, and there are countless examples of men’s sacrifices for their nations, faith, and families. Additionally, John Locke, in his essay “Law of Nature”, assumed that the code of moral behaviours was present in the state of nature. This assumption, nonetheless, encountered criticism regarding how and by whom these moral codes and natural laws could be understood.
Conclusion
In summation, to apprehend the importance of human society, government, and parliament and the necessity of the existence of coercive forces in society, particularly in England, Jean Jacques Rousseau, Thomas Hobbes, and John Locke provided their respective theories. Each of them gave his political philosophy on the state of nature, the condition of humans, their relations, behaviours, liberties, and conducts before the formation of society, deeming it necessary for a better understanding of societal functions. Moreover, the state of nature is further divided into three aspects: the natural man and his characteristics, the natural state of human circumstances, and the stimuli that compelled man to form a society. Nonetheless, each of the three gave somewhat similar or contrasting ideas of the state of nature.
CSS Solved Past Papers’ Essays
Looking for the last ten years of CSS and PMS Solved Essays and want to know how Sir Kazim’s students write and score the highest marks in the essays’ papers? Then, click on the CSS Solved Essays to start reading them.
CSS Solved Essays
CSS Solved General Science & Ability Past Papers
Want to read the last ten years’ General Science & Ability Solved Past Papers to learn how to attempt them and to score high? Let’s click on the link below to read them all freely. All past papers have been solved by Miss Iqra Ali & Dr Nishat Baloch, Pakistan’s top CSS GSA coach having the highest score of their students.
General Science & Ability Solved Past Papers
CSS Solved Pakistan Affairs Past Papers
Want to read CSS Pakistan Affairs Solved Past Papers and learn how to attempt them to score high? Let’s click on the link below to read them all freely. All past papers’ questions have been attempted by Sir Kazim’s students, who scored the highest in the subject.
CSS Solved Pakistan Affairs
CSS Solved International Relations’ Past Papers
Have you opted for International Relations in the CSS examination and want to score above 150? Then, click on the CSS Solved International Relations’ Past Papers by Miss Abeera Fatima, the top IR scorer and the best IR coach in Pakistan.
CSS Solved International Relations Past Papers
