Both john locke and jean-jacques rousseau offer contrasting visions of the state of nature. in an essay, describe the key starting points of each author’s respective understanding of the state of nature. what assumptions go into their descriptions? as a second step, explain how each of them explain the causes that led us away from this original state. which structural transformations caused us to quit the state of nature? finally, whose version of "human nature" (i. e., the starting assumptions) do you find more persuasive, and why?