Examples Of Hobbes Absolute Power Of The Sovereign

In the two speeches “I Have a Dream,” by Martin Luther King JR. and “Ain’t I a Woman?” by Sojourner Truth, there is a vast amount of similarities and differences. There are several examples that illustrate the analyzation by repetition and emotional appeal. Overall, the two speeches explain to us about the hardships us humans had been through.

Hobbes, on the other hand, does not foresee this case but only seems capable of enforcing a strong power. At this point, it is pertinent to point out the ambiguity that Locke shows in his "state of war," a state that is generated when natural law is placated by the willpower of certain men. The fundamental difference between Locke and Hobbes lies therefore in the conception of man in the state of nature; one sees him as a wolf for other men, and the other sees him as a born follower of the precepts of natural law until it is corrupted by their passions or by the actions of other men. The solution in both cases is to seek a reliable external power that limits the freedom of people and eliminate the "state of war." Unlike Hobbes, for Locke, the state of nature is not identified with the state of war. On the contrary, the state of war constitutes a violation, a degeneration of the state of nature, through the imposition of force in the absence of any right; a devaluation of what the state of nature must

Stemming from his theories regarding the definition of a good life, Hobbes’ view of political legitimacy is very centered on the ability of the ruler to effectively govern. The first and most important aspect of Hobbes’ view of legitimacy is the idea of a “social contract.” A social contract an agreement between those who are in power and those who are ruled which is a framework which one can view societal relations within. In Hobbes’ ideal government the citizens are free to do anything that is not proscribed by the state; however, if the sovereign creates laws or “chains,” citizens must accept them as legitimate because of the social contract that they tacitly agree to. Citizens give up their rights to resources and freedom of action in exchange for the benefits of peace as well as the protection of the sovereign. In essence, according to Hobbes, any government which can provide stability for its people is legitimate (although he also claims there may be benefits to an autocratic monarchy as opposed to more democratic forms of government.). Furthermore, Hobbes disputes the idea that people need to give explicit consent to be legitimately governed. In the utopian “Commonwealth” that Hobbes proposes a ruler can become legitimate not only through a concordat with the populace but also through strength of arms. If a ruler acquires power though coercive means then, according to Hobbes, he has total

Thomas Hobbes was an enlightened thinker who lived in the 17th century and through the upheaval that was the English Civil War. While observing the Civil War, Hobbes concluded that people are “naturally cruel, greedy, and selfish” (Ellis 183). Hobbes argued that a strict government was the only way to control people because, without it, they would fight, steal, and oppress each other. He said the only way to keep the people at bay was to have them obey strict laws. His favored government was an absolute monarchy because it “could impose order and compel obedience” (Ellis 183). In an absolute monarchy, the citizens give up all of their rights in order to be protected by their leader.

sovereign rules on behalf of its citizens and these citizens have a right to dissolve or

From the complex ideas introduced in the selected passage, Hobbes proceeds to construct a very significant yet disputable argument in which he encourages the need to submit ourselves to political authority. He justifies that although men are rational they are naturally self-interested and thus require the authority of a sovereign to govern them. The

If a power is present which is not strong enough for a man’s security, man will call on his strengths to secure himself from other men. It was clear to Hobbes, that men must group themselves together, with a leader capable of ensuring obedience of these natural laws. It is important that the group being governed is a large group because the small groups are not stable. The addition of only a few members with contrasting views to a small group, could destroy the entire community.

Furthermore, Thomas Hobbes believed that a strong government must exist and in order to achieve civilization, people must give up some of their freedoms for protection. In essence, he believed that “Government is necessary, not because man is naturally bad...but because man is by nature individualistic than social” (Hobbes). According to Hobbes, a government has the right to limit the freedoms of its people as long as it

Hobbes states that the proper form of civil government must have a supreme ruler governing the people in order to avoid the state of war. He believes that the goal of the people is to escape the state of war, and that they are willing to transfer their rights in order to leave it. “Whensoever a man transfers his right, or renounces it; it is either in consideration of some right reciprocally transferred to himself; or for some other good he hopes for thereby. For it is a voluntary act: and of the voluntary acts of every man, the object is some good to himself.”3 He believes that all men are equal in the state of nature despite any preexisting differences between them because they are ultimately powerful enough to defend themselves and their resources. “Nature hath made men so equal, in the faculties of the body, and mind; so that though there be found one man sometime manifestly stronger in body, or of quicker mind than another; yet

In this essay, the contrasting ideas of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke on liberty will be discussed and critically analyzed.

Norrie (1984, 313) is the only scholar to put forth a liberal view of Hobbes’s political thought while also maintaining a retributivist interpretation of his punishment theory. While Norrie does not deny Hobbes’s dismissal of revenge as a viable motive for punishment, he explains that classical retributivist theorists treated revenge in much the same manner. Ultimately, Norrie locates the basis for his retributivist argument in the contractualist elements of Hobbes’s text (Norrie 1984, 314). In essence, the subject’s “prior legislative act” of consenting to the social contract qualifies them for punishment. Thus, by granting coercive authority to the Sovereign, any punishment that the subject might incur is, in essence, his/her “own act). In

Hobbes is also eager on the fact that law is depended on power. “A law without a credible and powerful authority behind it is just simply not a law in any meaningful sense.”

Thomas Hobbes believed that the government should essentially limit itself to the protection of property and persons. Hobbes thought that power derived from the office, not from the people. Things like virtue, social equality, and welfare were not important. To protect themselves and their government Hobbes believed that it was imperative, natural and rational for people to give up some liberty in order to gain security of self-preservation. This is called the Social Contract. The concept of the Social Contract Theory is that, in the beginning, man lived in the state of nature where life was, “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (page 619). In this state every

Thomas Hobbes born in 1588, was an English political theorist who believed in Monarchy. Hobbes felt that humans, by nature were inherently selfish beings. During the English Civil war, he expressed the need for an absolute ruler. Like how a man has control over his household. To Hobbes, “without an absolute ruler people would kill each other” (Lawrence Smith Lecture). Due to humans being inherently selfish, they would risk the commonwealth of the community for themselves. This would likely cause complications in society and the social disorder. Hobbes conveyed that, “laws make people behave as civilized people” and without them, people

Hobbes suggested that physical strength does not define law and order, the weak person can also hurt/kill the strong person by using some techniques. Hobbes proposed there must be a power/state to control this violent acts of humans so that the society will feel safer. He further explained that the State must have some sort of punishment system in which perpetrators of violence are punished for their crimes. According to him the main purpose of the state is to protect the humans from their violence/evil and the best state is the one that have absolute power such as