Hobbes and Locke Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Hobbes and Locke - Essay Example Human beings naturally seek peace, and the best way to achieve peace is to construct the Leviathan through social contract. The Second Part: Of Commonwealth, shows the process of erecting the Leviathan by outlining the rights of sovereigns and subjects, and draws the legislative and civil mechanics of the commonwealth. He deduces twelve principals of the sovereign, proposes censorship of the press and the restriction of free speech rights for the promotion of order. The Third Part: Of the Christian Commonwealth, formulates the compatibility of Christian doctrine and the religious system of the Leviathan. He argues that though there is no God personally present in this world, even in the incarnation of Christ, there is a Prime Mover who intervenes in the world through the mediation of matter.Hobbes thus takes theological knowledge and reinterprets it to conform to his determination of natural facts and philosophical conclusions. The Fourth Part: Of the Kingdom of Darkness, engages in deflating false religious beliefs and argues that the political implementation of the Leviathanic state is necessary to achieve a secure Christian commonwealth.

Political science paper- comparative Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1500 words

Political science paper- comparative - Essay Example The theory adopts the rule of consensus decision making and majority rule. In an occurrence where a decision cannot be reached through consensus, a decision is reached through the majority rule by voting. The type of voting embraced by this theory involves one that does not regard authority. Every party of individual affected by the decision making process is effectively considered in terms of representation in the decision making process (Gutmann & Dennis 57). Deliberative democratic theory also represents representative democracy and direct democracy. In an argument by Ross deliberative democracy refer to representative bodies that give equal chance to its members to deliberate on a decision making procedure without uneven distribution of power due to authority or position an individual holds (87). Another definition of the theory given by Gutmann & Dennis depicts deliberative democratic theory refers to the system of governance where the lay citizens are given the power of making decisions (87). Generally, this theory acts with respect to democracy where every person is entitled to a decision or thought; and the thought or opinion is considered in a decision making process. The decision making process in this theory may be represented in tow forms depending on the parties involved. The decision making may be based on the elitist deliberative democracy or populist deliberative democracy. In elitist deliberative democracy, the involved parties use the social decision making bodies such as courts and legislatures to rule over a dispute or direct a decision making process. In the populist deliberative democracy the power is given to the people to decide on the opinion or decision to uphold. In an argument by Gutmann & Dennis the power given to the people is more significant than using decision making bodies since there is a higher probability that public opinion will be represented (132). The author further argues that populist deliberative democracy theory gene rates decisions that may be significant to the lives of involved citizens since their opinion will be greatly considered in the decision making process. Characteristics The characteristics that apply in deliberative democratic theory are greatly similar to the provision of any consensus approach. There are five characteristics of the theory; I. Information In any decision making process there are numerous information that are required in order to have a complete validation of option. In deliberative democratic theory, this information should be provided to all involved parties in the decision making process. Additionally, the information provided to the participants should be accurate and relevant to the consensus being held. Gutmann & Dennis argue that the theory may be distorted if the information provided to participants is biased, distorted or incomplete (122). II. Substantive balance All arguments considered in this theory should be met by contrary arguments that support the ar guments. According to Ross the opinions the participants bring forth should be supported by relevant and significant evidence in order for