The State Of Nature, By Thomas Hobbes

1429 Words6 Pages
One of Hobbes ideas are that every individual should surrender to the strongest political authority available if we want to survive living amongst each other. He justifies this by creating a hypothetical scenario of people living together before a society is established wereby everyone has to rely on their own strength to survive as there are no alliances to rely on and survival is purely based on strength-he refers to this as the State of Nature and to an extent anarchy which according to Hobbes is people in their natural state. In the State of Nature, which is a hypothetical creation Hobbes he explains that “men are naturally and exclusively self-interested”, and in this state basically everyone is almost equal to one another and the advantages…show more content…
Since a state will be granted the authority to enforce punishments for those who breach the social contract then people will begin adjusting their lifestyles to in accordance with the social contract unlike in the State of Nature wereby there was no officially authority to rule and enforce order so that people can co-operate despite their differences. This is a good way for people to live amongst each other harmoniously but the problem is Hobbes version of a social contract is that he believes that the those granted the ability to rule should have absolute authority as he believes this is better than living in the State of Nature. He believes no matter how badly a state treats its people we can never be justified in rebelling against a state as he believes it’s the only thing standing between a civilized society and a state of nature. Basically according to Hobbes without a social contract people wont adhere to morals and rules as there won’t be any authority to oblige them to as well as there wont be sufficient trust amongst each other for them to adhere to morals and rules which
Open Document