Would persons in such a state of nature agree to
surrender their freedom to those who ruled them?
Hobbes
Had a pessimistic view of life in the state of nature:
'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short', that
isolated individuals would rationally contract with
each other to hand over all of their sovereignty to a
single sovereign.
Hobbes saw this as unconditional except if an
individual's life was threatened.
On what conditions...
Locke
Sovereignty and natural rights were both present
in the state of nature.
Sovereign would only retain legitimacy
to the extent he protected the
individuals right to property.
Rousseau
Saw sovereignty in the will of the
people, which remained with them.
Sovereignty could not be the subject of
a contract - could only be loaned to
representatives, from whom it could be
withdrawn.