Do metaphors really matter? : An analysis of the use of metaphors in rhetoric
Introduction
José Ortega y Gasset, a renowned philosopher once wrote: “The metaphor is probably the most fertile power possessed by man”. Metaphors form a pervasive part of rhetoric, because they have a great influence of our cognitive process. (Pauley, 2014) The use of metaphors in rhetoric is very common; as metaphors have the power to make people act despite the ideologies that are being put forth. In this essay, the effectiveness of metaphors in an instance of rhetoric will be examined, as well as the implications that come as a consequence of utilizing metaphors in an instance of rhetoric. The instance of rhetoric that will be used in this particular case
…show more content…
(Hobbes, 2008) His proposal to end such a horrid state of nature is to make a third party the sovereign authority over all men. This third party is what is known as the Leviathan. He argues that when men give up their individual freedom in a social contract, then the Leviathan will be the authoritative figure of the society. The Leviathan, whose body is made up of the individuals that are part of the social contract, must have enough power and inspire enough awe that it replaces the fear that men previously had for violent death, so that they uphold their end of the covenant. It’s almost like a trade-off, where men trade in their fear of violent death for the fear of the Commonwealth Leviathan. If the Leviathan were not fearful, there would be no way of ensuring that other people would uphold their end of the bargain.
It is by no means fortuitous that, Hobbes uses the metaphor of a feared Leviathan to highlight his views of an ideal ‘state of nature.’ The Leviathan was not just a representation of his ideologies, but also a representation of the period in time in which he was writing, which was one of excessive conflict and strife. “Hobbes’ intentions behind his continual biblical references were influenced by the ongoing
Born during a period of medieval philosophy, Thomas Hobbes developed a new way of thinking. He perfected his moral and political theories in his controversial book Leviathan, written in 1651. In his introduction, Hobbes describes the state of nature as an organism analogous to a large person (p.42). He advises that people should look into themselves to see the nature of humanity. In his quote, “ The passions that incline men to peace, are fear of death; desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living; and a hope by their industry to obtain them,” Hobbes view of the motivations for moral behavior becomes valid because of his use of examples to support his theories, which in turn, apply to Pojman’s five purposes for morality.
This quote from Thomas Hobbes Leviathan,' summarizes his opinion of the natural condition of mankind as concerning their felicity and misery. He basically suggests a natural impulse for war embedded in the souls of men who do not have a ruler, or a king. They are without bounds, and without limits. It is a state of anarchy that he envisages.
Thomas Hobbes describes his views on human nature and his ideal government in Leviathan. He believes human nature is antagonistic, and condemns man to a life of violence and misery without strong government. In contrast to animals, who are able to live together in a society without a coercive power, Hobbes believes that men are unable to coexist peacefully without a greater authority because they are confrontational by nature. “In the nature of man”, Hobbes says “there are three principal causes of quarrel: first, competition; secondly, diffidence, thirdly, glory” and then he goes on to list man’s primary aims for each being gain, safety and reputation (Hobbes, Leviathan, 13, 6).
In this essay I will prove that Hobbes’ makes a good argument in his book Leviathan in paragraph eight on page eighty-four when he states that, “during the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war as is of everyman, against everyman. For war consisteth not in battle only or the act of fighting; but in a tract of time, wherein the will to content by battle is sufficiently known: and therefore the notion of time is to be considered in the nature of war, as it is in the nature of weather” (p. 84). I will prove this by identifying his main argument, his main premises and his final conclusion. I will then prove that his argument is logically strong and that it ties
To begin, Hobbes uses his most recognized work called the Leviathan to discuss several issues relating from the natural state of humans to more complex arguments about the equality of human beings. When observing Hobbes it best to start by examining his definition of appetites and aversions. For Hobbes appetites and aversions are outlined to be, “This endeavor, when it is
Thomas Hobbes was a divisive figure in his day and remains so up to today. Hobbes’s masterpiece, Leviathan, offended his contemporary thinkers with the implications of his view of human nature and his theology. From this pessimistic view of the natural state of man, Hobbes derives a social contract in order to avoid civil war and violence among men. Hobbes views his work as laying out the moral framework for a stable state. In reality, Hobbes was misconstruing a social contract that greatly benefited the state based on a misunderstanding of civil society and the nature and morality of man.
We will give Hobbes’ view of human nature as he describes it in Chapter 13 of Leviathan. We will then give an argument for placing a clarifying layer above the Hobbesian view in order to
Also, they transfer some of these rights to a select few members of society that use those rights to maintain the laws of the covenant. An ideal covenant, in Hobbes' mind, would be a large, powerful "leviathan" government to make and regulate laws at a high level of efficiency, hence the title of his work (the bible refers to the "leviathan" as a massive sea monster." Hobbes derives his Third Law of Nature from the second, which states it necessary that "men perform their covenants made" (31), because a covenant becomes void is any member violates or is reasonably suspected of violating the regulations of the covenant. In order to fortify what appears to be a fragile idea of a social contract, the members of the contract need to set up some sort of governing body that will punish violators of the covenant. The level and extremity of the punishment is important, because "the terror of...punishment [must be] greater than the benefit they expect by the breach of their covenant" (31). The idea is not only to punish those who break the laws of the social contract, but to scare off individuals from ever doing so. To carry out the regulations of a society, the members establish a commonwealth, which represents the general sentiment or voice of the society either through one leader or an assembly of them. The Third Law of Nature creates a sound society where peace is
Amidst the bloodshed of the English Civil War, Thomas Hobbes realizes the chaotic state of humanity, which gravitates towards the greatest evil. Hobbes’ underlying premises of human nature–equality, egotism, and competition–result in a universal war among men in their natural state. In order to escape anarchy, Hobbes employs an absolute sovereignty. The people willingly enter a social contract with one another, relinquishing their rights to the sovereign. For Hobbes, only the omnipotent sovereign or “Leviathan” will ensure mankind’s safety and security. The following essay will, firstly, examine Hobbes’ pessimistic premises of human nature (equality, egotism, and competition), in contrast with John Locke’s charitable views of humanity;
This source is an excerpt taken from the book Leviathan written by Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679). Thomas Hobbes is a British philosopher and a political theorist that lived during the times of turmoil in England. England in many ways is divided, in terms of politics, military and economical as well as religious means. Inequality is predominant in the social classes and caused upheavals among the people, creating civil wars all over the country. Ultimately, the struggles between the King and the parliament ended with the King’s head and soon tyranny and violence was rampant throughout England. Hence, influenced Hobbes’ idea of men being evil in nature.
The Leviathan is a book written by Thomas Hobbes. It is a centerpiece of the theory of government in the western world. Hobbes claimed that people should choose to have an authoritarian government that would save them from the misery that anarchy brings. When writing Leviathan, Hobbes used the Christian bible in many of his examples. One of the main examples was the case when the 12 tribes of Israel approached the prophet Samuel. The 12 tribes requested a King, and for that, Samuel responded everything that they will loss. The King will take their women and children, their vineyards, their best trees, 10% of every animal and everything that they have, everything will be given to those close to the King and the people of the 12 tribes will be
In the excerpt Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes talks about human beings living in the state of nature where conditions are, “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” (p.84) Hobbes claims, people will act in their best interest to form a powerful Sovereign to gain protection, he states “The mutual transferring of right, is that which men call contract.” (p.89) If this creation is to rescue people from their natural-self, then it is required for the sovereign to have complete power. He discloses that the sovereign must never be questioned, and hold indivisible rights.
According to the view Thomas Hobbes presents within the selected passaged in the Leviathan, we live in a narcissistic society where man’s condition is primarily driven by ego and where the achievement of personal goals is deemed paramount. Within the State of Nature that is, outside of civil society we have a right to all things ‘even to one another’s body’, and there would be no agreed authority to ensure the moral grounds of our decisions. Therefore since there are no restrictions and no shared authority; man is naturally un-guarded and prone to conflict and each individual is deemed a potential threat to our resources.
In Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes paints a grim picture about man’s natural state. Famously characterized as “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short (Hobbes 89),” man’s life is chaotic. The state of nature, Hobbes insists, is a “state of warre(Hobbes 88)” which pits men against men. Man naturally aims for felicity, defined as “continual success in obtaining those things which a man from time to time desire, that is to say, continual prospering (Hobbes 46).” People think of their own interests and their pursuits of said interests may put them into conflict with another, in which violent war may emerge. Man, thus, lives in a state of constant fear.
In Hobbes book Leviathan, he makes the natural man out to be a self obsessed monster who is only interested in his own self preservation. This would intern leave the state of nature to be consumed with war, “...because the condition of man is conditions of war of everyone against everyone”. With out the constrain of government Hobbes states “So that in the state of nature man will find three principal causes of quarrel: first, competition; secondly, diffidence; thirdly, glory” (Leviathan, 76). These principles would then leave men in the state of nature, with a life that Hobbes describes as “solitary, poor nasty, brutish, and short” (Leviathan, 76). Over all Hobbes view on the state of nature is a materialistic world where without an “absolute sovereign” the life of man would be nothing more then the “state of war”.