▸ HEAD-TO-HEAD
HOBBES VS LOCKE
Hobbes
1588–1679
What is is not what must be.
Locke
1632–1704
What is is not what must be.
▸ WHERE THEY SHARPLY DISAGREED
The three dimensions on which Hobbes and Locke are farthest apart on Mull's 0–10 scale.
- Tragic VisionΔ 4 / 10Hobbes: 7/10Locke: 3/10
clearly (4/10): Hobbes sees tragedy and limit as central; Locke doesn't make that the starting point.
- Will to PowerΔ 3 / 10Hobbes: 8/10Locke: 5/10
somewhat (3/10): Hobbes emphasises shaping and self-overcoming; Locke weighs acceptance or context more.
- Trust in ReasonΔ 2 / 10Hobbes: 9/10Locke: 7/10
somewhat (2/10): Hobbes trusts reasoned argument more strongly than Locke does.
▸ WHERE THEY OVERLAPPED
Where the gap is smallest — both with meaningful presence on the dimension (not "neither cared").
- Embodied Sensibilitygap 0 / 10Hobbes: 5/10Locke: 5/10
Both register moderate embodied sensibility.
- Communal Embeddednessgap 0 / 10Hobbes: 5/10Locke: 5/10
Both register moderate communal embeddedness.
- Theoretical Drivegap 1 / 10Hobbes: 7/10Locke: 6/10
Both register moderate theoretical drive.
▸ ALL 16 DIMENSIONS
The full vector comparison. Bars show their 0–10 scores side-by-side.
- Ascetic TendencyΔ 0
- Communal EmbeddednessΔ 0
- Embodied SensibilityΔ 0
- Mystical ReceptivityΔ 1
- Practical OrientationΔ 1
- Reverence for TraditionΔ 1
- Self as IllusionΔ 1
- Skeptical ReflexΔ 1
- Sovereign SelfΔ 2
- Theoretical DriveΔ 1
- Trust in ExperienceΔ 1
- Trust in ReasonΔ 2
- Tragic VisionΔ 4
- Universalist ImpulseΔ 2
- Vital AffirmationΔ 1
- Will to PowerΔ 3
◀ HOBBESLOCKE ▶
▶ What to do next