How and why do Hobbes and Locke using similar concepts of states of nature, natural law and contract come to different conclusions?

Seminar paper from the year 1997 in the subject Philosophy - Miscellaneous, London Metropolitan University, language: English, abstract: The fundamental differences between the political theories of Hobbes and Locke. Both Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) in his Leviathan and Locke (1623-1704), in his Two Treatises of Government, were among the very earliest historical political theorists to work out a theory of political obligation. For both thinkers, the theory of pollical obligation attempts to justify our submission to political authority, on both moral and prudential grounds. I will argue that the similarities between Hobbes and Locke, respecting the State of Nature, Natural Law and Social Contract, arise because both were seeking a non-theological, rational-legal foundation for political or state authority. Second, I will explain how the fundamental differences regarding the aforementioned concepts, are of greater significance, and explain how they come to radically different conclusions regarding the State which emerges from the state of nature.