“In the state of nature, profit is

the measure of right.”

–Thomas Hobbes (1588 – 1679)

John Locke’s theory is similar to Hobbes’ to the extent of social contract as the basis of creation of state. They differed on many accounts. Their description of state of nature and the content of social contract sharply differ. Hobbes painted a horrible picture of the state on nature whereas Locke portrayed state of nature as pleasant one. Locke’s state of nature was a state of equality, freedom and person. Hobbes gave up all the rights of people to sovereign by means of contract. According to Locke, they retained their natural rights to liberty, property and right to life. To Locke, the government was based on consent whereas Hobbes granted no place to consent since he was ardent supporter of absolute power of monarch. Locke favoured constitutional monarchy which could be dethroned by the parliament. Both, however, believed in the irrevocability of social contract. Both agreed that before the coming into being of state, there was a state of nature. Both, nevertheless, have been condemned as unrealistic and unhistorical.