Life Without Governance: Visions of the State of Nature

By: P. Raffaini Costa

R. M Ballantyne's Coral Island (1858) tells the story of three young British boys stranded on an island. Through the awe-inspiring power of courage and resilience, they courageously fight pirates, and in the end, live an idyllic life in a tropical haven. After reading Ballantyne's "foolish" depiction of the circumstance, William Goulding published Lord of the Flies (1963). In Goulding's story, his characters soon see themselves falling into dispute and later, tribal warfare. In telling their stories in such different manners, Ballantyne and Goulding suggest opposite pictures in answering what would life be like without governance.


The state of nature is a theoretical state of mankind, one where an authoritarian institution who governs over the people is extinct and humans are left to fend for themselves. This article examines the possible outcomes of this theoretical situation, presenting various renowned philosophers' perspectives on the matter. All this will lead to a conclusion to understand more clearly what life means in a govern-less society.


The first perspective to be analysed is from Thomas Hobbes, where he mentions the "state of nature" several times in his most distinguished work, Leviathan. His take on the matter grows from his assumption that humans are driven by pursuit of self-interest. His mechanist view of human beings was derived from, interestingly enough, the conservation of motion. He believed, that like objects, humans kept constant motion unless a force was acted upon them. Becoming tired and desiring rest is simply to have a different motion act upon us. Hobbes argues that human beings seek ‘felicity’, the continual success in achieving the objects of desire. He explains in Leviathan (129-30) that the search of felicity ultimately would bring the stateless society into war. Hobbes supports this claim with several theories. He argues that human beings possess roughly the same level of strength, and so, any human being has the capacity to kill any other. “The weakest has strength enough to kill the strongest, either by secret machination or by confederacy with others” (Leviathan 183). Moreover, he assumes that in the state of nature, goods are scarce, so that two people will ultimately desire to possess the same thing, leading to conflict, and eventually, war. His theory of the state of nature also implies that all must always be on their own guard, yet even if one possesses nothing, one must not be free from fear. Others may take oneself as a threat, and the individual easily falls victim to a pre-emptive strike. Therefore, Hobbes' ideal of the "natural state" is not a pretty one. It is one where life would ultimately become unbearable, falling to the hands of conflict and war.

John Locke's view on the "state of nature" was considerably distinct to Hobbes's view. He was keen to emphasise that Hobbes's identification of the state of nature to be the state of war as a mistake. He supposed that it would be generally possible to live an acceptable life in the absence of power. This argument rooted from Locke's belief that humans were neither innately good nor bad, but simply equal and born under the "law of nature". Not to be confused with the state of nature, the "law of nature" is the universal moral, discoverable through reasoning and human rationality. This meant that in a society with no authority, humans were to respect each other's fundamental rights to life. In the Second treatise, 12,275 Locke refers to the case of transgressions in the state of nature. "Each transgression may be punished to that degree, and with so much severity as will suffice to make it an ill bargain for the offender and terrify others from similar acts". This meant that offenders who committed transgressions would cause society to repent the act and bring the villain to justice. However, this ideal would bring contradiction: The offender- who may well be an unreasonable person with like-minded friends might return armed, with forces to gain revenge. Considering this, Locke explained that people would disagree about the interpretation of the "law of nature", people would disagree whether an offence has taken place and people would disagree on proper punishment. This would, indifferently from Hobbes' standpoint, lead to war and chaos. In essence, human beings would tolerate living in a stateless world at start. However, as conflicts grow and indifferences start to become apparent, the world would fall again to destruction and war.

Another great mind to touch on the concept of a "state of nature" is Rousseau, who held a totally distinct perspective from Hobbes and Locke. His description of the natural state on his work Discourse on the origin of inequality gives insight into how he visualised this idealist society. Rousseau held a more holistic belief that human beings are motivated by pity and compassion, and so overestimated the likelihood of conflict in the natural state. From pity, he believed human beings had an "innate repugnance to see his kind suffer", this to him was "so natural even the beasts show signs of it". For Rousseau, it is a matter of regret that society has grown civilised. His treatise on education begins: "God makes all things good; man meddles with them, and they become evil." And on his discourse on the arts and sciences (1750), argues that art and sciences have done more to corrupt than to purify morality. Rousseau regarded that fact that to view and understand functionality of the state of nature, one mustn't view it with a civilised mind. In turn, this suggested the idea that as societies developed, so did languages and the opportunity for comparison. This gave rise to pride, shame and envy, as the state of nature began to transform itself, causes of dissention and quarrel break out. To Rousseau, this is the moment where war sparked, and society started to sponsor bloodshed and suffering.

Overall, it becomes evident that the question of life without the state cannot be answered in a single, definitive way. Hobbes depicts the state of nature as a vicious reality undermined by fear and war, whereas Locke’s perspective does consider a degree of stability, but ultimately forces the collapse of society. Rousseau envisions a state of purer existence, which, almost regretfully, became corrupted by progress of civilisation. These perspectives each highlight a different facet of human existence; our capacity for self-interest, reason and cooperation and the instinct for compassion. Nevertheless, understanding these perspectives together suggests a new discussion point. They indicate that the state of nature is less of a historical reality than a mirror reflecting each philosopher’s assumptions about mankind. The creation of the state as inevitable or necessary is based on unifying their visions, whether to protect individuals from violence, arbitrate disputes, or to prevent the corruption of human morality. More psychologically, the state of nature can be considered a thought experiment that requires us to think about human ethics, question ourselves about society’s functions and confront tension between freedom and security. Judging the state of nature from an impartial perspective is impossible, coming from humans inserted in a civil society: this is why our perception of the state of nature reveals how we perceive other humans and understand human connection. Overall, life without complete governance may or may not have been a reality, but it is undeniably a measure of our hopes and fears about society.
​


Bibliography
A Discourse on the Sciences and the Arts. Encyclopædia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/A-Discourse-on-the-Sciences-and-the-Arts.


Bi, Johnathan. “Discourse on the Arts and Sciences by Rousseau | Notes & Summary.” Johnathan Bi, 14 June 2024, https://www.johnathanbi.com/p/discourse-on-the-arts-and-sciences.


Leviathan; or, the Matter, Form, and Power of a Commonwealth, Ecclesiastical and Civil. Encyclopædia Britannica, 28 Aug. 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Leviathan-by-Hobbes.


State of Nature (Political Theory). Encyclopædia Britannica, 19 Aug. 2025, https://www.britannica.com/topic/state-of-nature-political-theory.
“The False Allure of a ‘Natural State’ of Man.” Farnam Street, https://fs.blog/the-false-allure-of-a-natural-state-of-man/.


“The Political Philosophies of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke.” University of Tennessee at Chattanooga, https://www.utc.edu/health-education-and-professional-studies/center-for-reflective-citizenship/2017-faculty-fellow-american-history-and-government-teaching-modules/thomas-hobbes-john-locke.


Two Treatises of Government. Encyclopædia Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Two-Treatises-of-Government.