Which of the following offers the best comparison between Hobbes’s and Locke’s perspectives on the divine right of kings?(1 point)
Responses
Hobbes supported the divine right of kings as absolute monarchs.
Hobbes supported the divine right of kings as absolute monarchs.
Locke supported the divine right of kings because it gave people more freedom.
Locke supported the divine right of kings because it gave people more freedom.
As Christians, both accepted the divine right of kings.
As Christians, both accepted the divine right of kings.
Both saw the divine right of kings as unnatural and bad.
Both saw the divine right of kings as unnatural and bad.
Both saw the divine right of kings as unnatural and bad.
None of the given responses offer an accurate comparison between Hobbes's and Locke's perspectives on the divine right of kings. To determine the best comparison between their perspectives, it is important to understand their respective views.
Thomas Hobbes, a 17th-century philosopher, argued for absolute monarchy as the most effective form of government. He believed that humans were inherently selfish and prone to conflict, and that a strong authoritarian ruler was necessary to maintain order and prevent chaos. While Hobbes did not specifically mention the divine right of kings in his works, his support for absolute monarchy aligns with the concept.
On the other hand, John Locke, also a 17th-century philosopher, presented a different perspective on government. He emphasized the idea of natural rights, including life, liberty, and property. Locke believed that government should be based on the consent of the governed and that rulers should be limited in their power. He did not support the divine right of kings, as he considered it unjust and incompatible with individual freedoms.
Given this understanding, the most accurate comparison between Hobbes's and Locke's perspectives on the divine right of kings is as follows:
Hobbes supported the divine right of kings as absolute monarchs, while Locke rejected the divine right of kings and advocated for limited government based on consent and the protection of individual rights.