Once one considers the political theories of Hobbes and Rousseau it is apparent that Hobbes' theory is far more optimistic in regards to human potential for civilization. Were Rousseau sees inherent inequality in man that apparently only increases when man enters civil society Hobbes believes man is inherently equal, and that is the basis of equality not inequality that leads man to enter civil society.
             "Government and its laws provide for the security and well-being of men united in society, while literature, the sciences and the arts...strew garlands of flowers on the iron chains that bind them, make them forget the original freedom for which they seem to have been born, cause them to love their slavery, and turn them into what is known as a civilized people.
             For Hobbes the state of nature, war of all against all, gives birth to the state of man, power and pleasure seeking, which in turn gives birth to a state of government, a means of controlling man at war while still allowing individual advancement. Rousseau sees the chain of events a little differently. Rousseau although recognizes mans inclination towards self and self-preservation, does not see the state of nature with the same level of harshness as Hobbes. For Rousseau man is born in a natural state of freedom and it is through the formation of some sort of civil society that man develops an inclination towards self-satisfaction. It is only then through this social development that Rousseau sees the species of man falling into a sequence of degradation.
             Hobbes views the human person in an eight-part structure, material; man is a material body interacting with matter within the world, sensing; human's senses are the receptors of mater in the material world, radically individual; each human senses one form of matter different than another and thus our experiences are individually isolated, passionate; humans are fixated by pleasure and pain, po
             ...