Even more than Bacon, Thomas Hobbes illustrated the transition from medieval to modern thinking in Britain. His Leviathan effectively developed a vocabulary for philosophy in the English language by using Anglicized versions of the technical terms employed by Greek and Latin authors. Careful use of words to signify common ideas in the mind, Hobbes maintained, avoids the difficulties to which human reasoning is most obviously prone and makes it possible to articulate a clear conception of reality. (Leviathan I 4)
For Hobbes, that conception is bound to be a mechanistic one: the movements of physical objects will turn out to be sufficient to explain everything in the universe. The chief purpose of scientific investigation, then, is to develop a geometrical account of the motion of bodies, which will reveal the genuine basis of their causal interactions and the regularity of the natural world. Thus, Hobbes defended a strictly materialist view of the world.
Human beings are physical objects, according to Hobbes, sophisticated machines all of whose functions and activities can be described and explained in purely mechanistic terms. Even thought itself, therefore, must be understood as an instance of the physical operation of the human body. Sensation, for example, involves a series of mechanical processes operating within the human nervous system, by means of which the sensible features of material things produce ideas in the brains of the human beings who perceive them. (Leviathan I 1)
Human action is similarly to be explained on Hobbes's view. Specific desires and appetites arise in the human body and are experienced as discomforts or pains which must be overcome. Thus, each of us is motivated to act in such ways as we believe likely to relieve our discomfort, to preserve and promote our own well-being. (Leviathan I 6) Everything we choose to do is strictly determined by this natural inclination to relieve the physical pressures that impinge upon our bodies. Human volition is nothing but the determination of the will by the strongest present desire.
Hobbes nevertheless supposed that human agents are free in the sense that their activities are not under constraint from anyone else. On this compatibilist view, we have no reason to complain about the strict determination of the will so long as we are not subject to interference from outside ourselves. (Leviathan II 21)
As Hobbes acknowledged, this account of human nature emphasizes our animal nature, leaving each of us to live independently of everyone else, acting only in his or her own self-interest, without regard for others. This produces what he called the "state of war," a way of life that is certain to prove "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." (Leviathan I 13) The only escape is by entering into contracts with each othermutually beneficial agreements to surrender our individual interests in order to achieve the advantages of security that only a social existence can provide. (Leviathan I 14)
Unable to rely indefinitely on their individual powers in the effort to secure livelihood and contentment, Hobbes supposed, human beings join together in the formation of a commonwealth. Thus, the commonwealth as a whole embodies a network of associated contracts and provides for the highest form of social organization. On Hobbes's view, the formation of the commonwealth creates a new, artificial person (the Leviathan) to whom all responsibility for social order and public welfare is entrusted. (Leviathan II 17)
Of course, someone must make decisions on behalf of this new whole, and that person will be the sovereign. The commonwealth-creating covenant is not in essence a relationship between subjects and their sovereign at all. Rather, what counts is the relationship among subjects, all of whom agree to divest themselves of their native powers in order to secure the benefits of orderly government by obeying the dictates of the sovereign authority. (Leviathan II 18) That's why the minority who might prefer a different sovereign authority have no complaint, on Hobbes's view: even though they have no respect for this particular sovereign, they are still bound by their contract with fellow-subjects to be governed by a single authority. The sovereign is nothing more than the institutional embodiment of orderly government.
Since the decisions of the sovereign are entirely arbitrary, it hardly matters where they come from, so long as they are understood and obeyed universally. Thus, Hobbes's account explicitly leaves open the possibility that the sovereign will itself be a corporate persona legislature or an assembly of all citizensas well as a single human being. Regarding these three forms, however, Hobbes himself maintained that the commonwealth operates most effectively when a hereditary monarch assumes the sovereign role. (Leviathan II 19) Investing power in a single natural person who can choose advisors and rule consistently without fear of internal conflicts is the best fulfillment of our social needs. Thus, the radical metaphysical positions defended by Hobbes lead to a notably conservative political result, an endorsement of the paternalistic view.
Hobbes argued that the commonwealth secures the liberty of its citizens. Genuine human freedom, he maintained, is just the ability to carry out one's will without interference from others. This doesn't entail an absence of law; indeed, our agreement to be subject to a common authority helps each of us to secure liberty with respect to others. (Leviathan II 21) Submission to the sovereign is absolutely decisive, except where it is silent or where it claims control over individual rights to life itself, which cannot be transferred to anyone else. But the structure provided by orderly government, according to Hobbes, enhances rather than restricts individual liberty.
Whether or not the sovereign is a single heredetary monarch, of course, its administration of social order may require the cooperation and assistance of others. Within the commonwealth as a whole, there may arise smaller "bodies politic" with authority over portions of the lives of those who enter into them. The sovereign will appoint agents whose responsibility is to act on its behalf in matters of less than highest importance. Most important, the will of the sovereign for its subjects will be expressed in the form of civil laws that have either been decreed or tacitly accepted. (Leviathan II 26) Criminal violations of these laws by any subject will be appropriately punished by the sovereign authority.
Despite his firm insistence on the vital role of the sovereign as the embodiment of the commonwealth, Hobbes acknowledged that there are particular circumstances under which it may fail to accomplish its purpose. (Leviathan II 29) If the sovereign has too little power, is made subject to its own laws, or allows its power to be divided, problems will arise. Similarly, if individual subjects make private judgments of right and wrong based on conscience, succomb to religious enthisiasm, or acquire excessive private property, the state will suffer. Even a well-designed commonwealth may, over time, cease to function and will be dissolved.
Hobbes' View of Human Nature and his Vision of Government
- Length: 446 words (1.3 double-spaced pages)
- Rating: Excellent
Hobbes' View of Human Nature and his Vision of Government
In The Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes talks about his views of human nature and describes his vision of the ideal government which is best suited to his views.
Hobbes believed that human beings naturally desire the power to live well and that they will never be satisfied with the power they have without acquiring more power. After this, he believes, there usually succeeds a new desire such as fame and glory, ease and sensual pleasure or admiration from others. He also believed that all people are created equally. That everyone is equally capable of killing each other because although one man may be stronger than another, the weaker may be compensated for by his intellect or some other individual aspect. Hobbes believed that the nature of humanity leads people to seek power. He said that when two or more people want the same thing, they become enemies and attempt to destroy each other. He called this time when men oppose each other war. He said that there were three basic causes for war, competition, distrust and glory. In each of these cases, men use violence to invade their enemies territory either for their personal gain, their safety or for glory. He said that without a common power to unite the people, they would be in a war of every man against every man as long as the will to fight is known. He believed that this state of war was the natural state of human beings and that harmony among human beings is artificial because it is based on an agreement. If a group of people had something in common such as a common interest or a common goal, they would not be at war and united they would be more powerful against those who would seek to destroy them. One thing he noted that was consistent in all men was their interest in self-preservation.
Hobbes view of human nature lead him to develop his vision of an ideal government. He believed that a common power was required to keep men united. This power would work to maintain the artificial harmony among the people as well as protect them from foreign enemies.
How to Cite this Page
|Essay on The Vision - 1 Introduction: The Vision All faiths can significantly influence how we approach ecological sustainability. Krznaric (2008) says across the world’s religion there is an increasing awareness of the dangers of climate change and the urgent need to address these problems Christianity and Hinduism are among these faiths that contribute to good ecological practice. Their principles correspond to the core values of sustainability, as defined by Our Common Future Report (1987); these essential components are environmental protection, improvement of socio-economic conditions, and instituting environmental policy; and are very much evident in contemporary ecological theories; the World Charter f... [tags: Religion, Christianity, Hinduism]||1353 words|
| Essay about A Utopian View of Creativity - A Utopian View of Creativity It is practically impossible to predict or to create the conditions which give rise to great literature, art or music. The introduction to the sixteenth century in your anthology discusses broad topics such as humanism, nationalism, and the Reformation which played major roles in stimulating a literature of unusual quality. It is intriguing if somewhat fruitless to speculate about our own century--to ask whether similar cultural earthquakes are occurring that will someday make the end of the twentieth century a period to reckon with.... [tags: Creative Creativity Nature Essays]|
:: 2 Works Cited
| Who's Vision Did America Follow? Essay - America has gone through an incredible journey to be the country it is today. Whether it was discovering new territories, developing new connections between regions, or acquiring knowledge to benefit the land, America has grown into a prosperous country with significant ideals that were developed by its founding fathers. Two of the country’s founding fathers were Thomas Jefferson and John Quincy Adams. Though both had some differing visions for America, the country was founded on a combination of both of their insights and wisdom.... [tags: Thomas Jefferson, John Quincy Adams]|
:: 6 Works Cited
|Thomas Jefferson And His Vision Essay - Jefferson and his Vision Guided by his fervent and unwavering commitment to reason and the principles of natural law and natural rights, Thomas Jefferson crafted his own unique political and social vision for the United States of America which, excluding a few notable omissions, has survived to become an important contribution to the cornerstone of American democracy. His vision was of an agrarian and populist nation of citizens with access to general and widespread education, whose rulers are chosen on grounds of their individual merits and talents rather than on basis of birth and inheritance, and governed by a decentralized system of government, whose main duty is to safeguard the unalie... [tags: American History]||1324 words|
|Essay on Jefferson and Steibeck's Vision of America - While many may enjoy pigeonholing America into the quasi-theocracy category of government, seeing as numerous federal fixtures have been injected with a healthy dose of Christianity, it may surprise John Q. Public to learn that many of our Founding Fathers envisioned no such state. Just take Thomas Jefferson’s Second Inaugural Address in which he clearly states that, “In matters of religion, I have considered that its free exercise is placed by the Constitution independent of the powers of the general government.... [tags: American Culture]||1548 words|
|Essay on The Dual Nature of the Progressive Era - The Dual Nature of the Progressive Era One common misconception is to view the Progressive movement as a unified core of reform-minded crusaders dedicated to improving the social welfare of American society. While this viewpoint is not entirely incorrect, it is only a partial and thereby misleading assessment of the movement that categorized the early part of the nineteenth-century. What some may fail to appreciate is the duality of the period-the cry for social welfare reforms juxtaposed against the demand for optimum efficiency through scientific controls.... [tags: Papers]||1325 words|
| An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of NationsAdam Smith - In 1776, Adam Smith completed and published “An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations”, more commonly referred to as simply “The Wealth of Nations”. In this document, Smith analyzed wages, labor, trade, population, rents, and money supply (Andrea, 151). Because of his work, Smith is known as the founder of the academic study of economics and the father of capitalism. The kind of economy Smith envisioned and described in “The Wealth of Nations” resembles capitalism, as well as promoted a free market.... [tags: Wages, Labor, Trade, Population, Finances]|
:: 3 Works Cited
|The State of Nature and its Implications for Civilization in Hobbes and Rousseau - The State of Nature and its Implications for Civilization in Hobbes and Rousseau In his Leviathan Thomas Hobbes expresses a philosophy of civilization which is both practical and just and stems from a clear moral imperative. He begins with the assertion that in the state of nature man is condemned to live a life “solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.” It is in the interest of every man to rise above this “state of nature” and to give up certain rights so that the violent nature of the human animal can be subdued.... [tags: Philosophy Philosophical Essays Hobbes]||1651 words|
| Essay on Contrasting Poets Lawrence And Shapiro In Their Views Of Nature - Contrasting Poets Lawrence and Shapiro in Their Views of Nature Throughout the history of literature, poetic views of nature has evolved through time. One of the most differing eras is the twentieth century. With it's non-classical views, the twentieth century is one of the most influential eras. While the Victorian era practiced traditional values, the twentieth century influences techniques of love and the loss of the beauty in nature. Poets of the same century have multiple views, many differing.... [tags: essays research papers fc]|
:: 10 Works Cited
| Machiavelli's The Prince: Politics, War, and Human Nature Essay - Machiavelli's The Prince: Politics, War, and Human Nature "[I]t is necessary for a prince to know well how to use the beast and the man." (Machiavelli, The Prince, p. 69). In this swift blow, Niccolò Machiavelli seems to strike down many visions of morality put up on pedestals by thinkers before his time. He doesn't turn to God or to some sort of common good for his political morality. Instead, he turns to the individual?more specifically, self-preservation in a position of power.... [tags: Machiavelli Prince Essays Papers]|
:: 3 Works Cited
Human Nature Hobbes Vision Government One Man Ease Talks Fight Admiration Thomas Hobbes
This power would either be one man or an assembly appointed by the people. The people would make an agreement among themselves to all submit to this ruler. The people would submit their wills to the will of their ruler who would in turn assure their self-preservation. Thus the ruler would have absolute control over his domain. Hobbes referred to this kind of ruler as a Sovereign and his people as subjects.