How do Hobbes and Rousseau differ on the source of political authority?

• A. Hobbes argued for an absolute sovereign to avoid the state of nature; Rousseau argued for sovereignty from the general will.
• B. Hobbes supported democracy; Rousseau supported oligarchy.
• C. Both supported absolute monarchies.
• D. Both denied the social contract.

Answer: (A)

The key idea is where political authority comes from. Hobbes argues that to escape the brutal state of nature, individuals consent to a social contract that transfers power to an absolute sovereign; the ruler’s authority comes from that contract and is meant to be undivided and strong to maintain order. Rousseau, by contrast, contends that legitimate political authority springs from the general will of the people, so sovereignty resides with the citizens themselves and laws enact the collective will, with government acting as its agent. This contrast shows two different sources of authority: an all-powerful ruler derived from a contractual grant, versus the people’s collective sovereignty expressed through the general will. The other options miss the distinction by mislabeling their positions on democracy or oligarchy, or by suggesting they deny the social contract, which they do not.