Hobbes and Locke's ideas and notions about social and political contracts, as well as natural rights and order. Social contract: - what is it in each point of view? - what are the rights lost/received? - why does everyone believe that a contract must be made? - Who is involved in the contract? - how does the contract change human society? - how does it go from the state of nature to a contract? Natural rights: -what are natural rights according to each view?-who benefits from natural rights?-is there a reason to contract with rights?-are the rights somewhat similar?-how do they function in a social society?Hobbes and Locke on the social contract and the concept of natural rights. Although Thomas Hobbes and John Locke are both social/natural contracts, life itself determines one of Hobbes' most fundamental laws, and the reason he thinks contracts must be formed: the law of self-preservation. The simplest and easiest way for man to maintain his life is to abolish the state of perpetual war and seek peace instead. The idea of ​​peace is that of a society with a sovereign, whose power overwhelms and intimidates all the subjects of the society: his power prevents normal citizens from using their natural power against each other, since his power of punishing triumphs over all. To this common, or sovereign, power are transferred the rights of all citizens of society and entrusted with security, peace and prosperity.6 Hobbes's view of human nature appears very pessimistic and his need for contract is out of place. a natural distrust of others. Locke on the other hand has a more liberal view of the state of nature, although it ties in similarly to Hobbes' ideas of contract. Human nature and the state of nature, as seen by Locke, are very liberal compared to Hobbes' view. Locke sees the state of nature as one of perfect freedom and perfect equality, within the limits of the law of nature. The law of nature, as seen by Locke, does not state that this method is perfect, since "monarchs are but men", but it seems to be the best method for resolving and regulating justice in population conflicts. Judging from the states of nature I have outlined, it might be tempting to come to the conclusion that Hobbes and Locke share almost opposite views on the subject, although I would argue that this is incorrect. Locke's view of the state of nature is decidedly more liberal, as he believes that humans have natural empathy towards others, although this once again raises the idea of ​​conservation. Hobbes's need for peace from the social contract may be related to Locke's, as Locke implies that humans will naturally seek to undermine others for their own gain, though instead of completely overpowering people, through a "system of justice " distorted. Locke takes the war on “property” a step further (Hobbes says that all men fight for common desires, which no two men can share), saying that men will seek to steal and weaken others instead of merely killing and fight, implying a (perhaps) lower) sense of distrust between people.Onto