The differences are very important to justification of different types of governments and moral values (Hobbes 2006 & Dent 2005).
The social contract theory has explained the significance of legitimate forms of governance. The starting point of the explanation has always been the state when no form of any governance exists (Thomas & Dale 2009).
According to Hobbes, people are usually guided by a particular driving force or a reason. People in state of nature on the other hand were being guided by natural primitive, nature like animal instincts. Accordingly, Hobbes believes that moral concepts like ideology of good and evil does not subsist in state of nature (Hobbes 2006 & Dent 2005). Man therefore could employ any available means to protect his life and thing around him. Man had to use some means to escape this and according to Hobbes, the laws of nature helped man to find peace and also allow man to natural right to things as long as others would emulate the mutual transfer of rights is termed as the "contract"
Locke John believes many of the ideas by Hobbes like contract. Nonetheless, the some conditions they differ. In the view of the state of nature, Locke believes that people could still maintain peace without the civil society because there were natural laws which guided everyone. ...