Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan and John Locke's Two Treatises of Government produced two definitive and very different theories of government. Although both philosophers seem rooted in the concept of natural law, why do Hobbes and Locke seem to come to two opposite conclusions about society and government? The answer lies in the critical distinctions between their interpretations of the state of nature, including their conjectures about human nature, their perceptions of freedom and equality, and their ultimate reasoning for civil society. Human nature is an integral part of the theory of the state of nature. Hobbes theorizes that human nature is imperfect, as men are naturally selfish and hedonistic: “of every man's voluntary acts, the object is a good unto itself” (Hobbes, 1996, p. 93). This suggests that in a natural state humans are guided only by their own needs and desires. Consequently, Hobbes believes that the only law governing the state of nature is the maintenance of self-preservation. This gives rise to a clash of desires, which forces man to undermine all concern for others and to put himself above all else. The extent to which man is able to undermine others for the sake of his own advantage is also unlimited according to Hobbes: “ in this law of Nature for where no covenant was preceded, no right was transferred and every man had right to everything; and consequently, no action can be unjust” (Hobbes, 1996, p. 100). There is a clear Hobbesian vision of morality beginning to take shape. Good and evil seem to be relative to Hobbes. Because of this, each individual in the state of nature has different perceptions of morality, which often conflict, creating disagreements that only incite violence. This pr...... half of the document ...... have consent to act. This essentially gives sovereign power to the people. This philosophy is also consistent with Locke's favor for a republican structure of government. The apparent difference observed between the political theories of Hobbes and Locke can be attributed to their different views on the state of nature. The development of humanity as a selfish being living in a state of war and violently attempting to achieve equality naturally leads Hobbes to conclude that an authoritative power is needed to instill order into chaos. On the other side of the spectrum, Lock shapes the state of nature into a state of peace, attributing men to reasonable creatures and consequently creating a representative government in which the people hold sovereign power. Essentially, these theories appear to be the result of a pessimistic and optimistic view of nature and humanity.