Hobbes and Locke, both English philosophers, recognized the concept of a "social contract" — that governmental authority stems from the people's consent. However, their perspectives on why individuals seek governance greatly diverged.
Thomas Hobbes articulated his political philosophy in Leviathan in 1651, a period marked by the turmoil of the English Civil War. He perceived humans as inherently distrustful, engaged in competition, and capable of malign behavior towards one another. Establishing a government, in his view, required sacrificing personal freedoms in exchange for protection against what would otherwise devolve into a state of constant conflict among individuals.
Conversely, John Locke released his Two Treatises on Civil Government in 1690, in the aftermath of the relatively peaceful power transition known as the Glorious Revolution in England. Locke posited that individuals are born as tabula rasa—without any prior knowledge or moral inclinations. As they experience life, they acquire knowledge about the optimal existence and thus choose to form governments to enhance societal conditions.
In my classroom discussions, I often explain their differing philosophies through an analogy to playground basketball. Hobbes argues that a referee is essential to prevent the players from descending into fierce arguments and violence, given the competitive nature of individuals. On the other hand, Locke believes that while a referee can improve the game by ensuring fair conflict resolution, it is possible to enjoy a match without one. It's important to note that both philosophers never referenced basketball, a sport invented in 1891 by James Naismith, but this analogy helps illustrate their contrasting ideas.
Effectiveness of Gambling: It inspires hope that a person might win through their actions, with some individuals securing massive monetary rewards even though they are the minority, potentially enabling a transition from poverty to wealth.
Ineffectiveness: Many develop unrealistic expectations, leading to gambling addictions; rather than gaining wealth, individuals often waste money consistently.
Effectiveness of Informal Trading: Provides greater freedom to negotiate prices since sellers are not bound by strict rules, requires no extensive employee management, and offers flexibility to relocate since businesses rarely operate in government premises.
Ineffectiveness: Prices can fluctuate arbitrarily, and informal traders might more easily engage in dishonest practices to benefit their business.
Please consider marking my response as brainliest. Thank you!
At the lowest employment level, only one hundred and seven (107) million Americans were working in non-agricultural positions.
Employment rates began to consistently improve after hitting their lowest in 2010.
In 2010, the labor market in the United States was weak, having experienced deterioration for the preceding two years.
It was during the first quarter that the unemployment rate and levels began to decrease.
By the end of 2010, only 14.8 million individuals were unemployed, resulting in a decrease in the unemployment rate by 9.6 percent.
The labor force's unemployed and employed individuals were maintained in 2010.
When resources were plentiful, nations enjoyed stability and prosperity. They could engage in trade or use diplomacy to ward off invasions. However, scarcity of resources sparked competition and disputes, as groups sought to secure valuable materials for themselves. Therefore, abundant resources meant economic exchange and peace, while shortages led to increased risk and hostility for a country.
<span />
Response:
utilizing media to gain public backing for an idea
motivating Congress to take action
setting a national public policy objective
Explanation:
