Thomas Hobbes: The Originator Of Modern Political Philosophy

Hobbes’ theory on the state of nature is based on the concept of individualism: that the individuals who comprise society are the only factors to be considered when analyzing it. Consequently, Hobbes claimed that men are all selfish and simply concerned with themselves, regardless of the damage that their actions cause to others. This behavior would result in divergence, and ultimately lead to a ‘State of War’ between men.

With these natural causes of quarrel, Hobbes concludes that the natural condition of humans is a state of perpetual war of all against all, where no morality exists, and everyone lives in constant fear (p.45). He believes that humans have three motivations for ending this state of war: the fear of death, the desire to have an adequate living and the hope to attain this through one’s labor (p.47). These beliefs become valid because of the use of his examples. One example suggests that people are barbaric to each other. With the absence of international law, strong countries prey on the weakness of weak countries. I believe that his views of moral behavior are very true. Like Hobbes said, people are out for their well-being. If I were to do a favor for someone, I may think I am helping someone out, which I am, but I am probably doing the favor because it is going to make me feel better. It is going to benefit my well being. Hobbes is a famous philosopher whose views were very controversial. But the fact that he lived in a time when the monarchy was the “divine right of kings” (p.42), makes his views valid today. With a different government and new laws, his views appear to be true.

Hobbes believed that people each have their own ideas of right and wrong, and that there is no way to tell if a person’s version of right and wrong is universally right or wrong. Practically, that each person will create their own rationalization and will even kill another person for physical safety or securing

His answer allows us to reach the core of his political theory found in chapter 13 of Leviathan. The chapter opens with his bold proclamation; “Nature hath made men so equal” (Hobbes Ch. 13, 76). Hobbes is expressing a simple statement. We are all beings of desire and we all seek ways, through power, to satisfy those desires. In Hobbes eyes, we are all somewhat equal, yet some are stronger or smarter. However, all humans have weaknesses and therefore all humans are equally vulnerable. Hobbes illustrates this point as follows:

Thomas Hobbes was a philosopher from England whose work and ideas have arguably made him the founder of modern political philosophy. His most famous work is the Leviathan, which he wrote in 1651. In it he describes his view of human nature and hence his view of government. Hobbes’ view of justice is based on his view of what he names the state of nature and the right of nature. Hobbes defines the state of nature as a “war” of everyone against everyone. Hobbes describes the right of nature to be self-preservation. Justice, in order to appease both the state of nature and the right of nature, is then a human construct created out of our drive for self-preservation, at least according to Hobbes. He defines justice as the keeping of valid or enforced

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).

Hobbes believed that people should not possess any rights, because if we did, chaos would be created. Chaos would come afloat because humans are greedy, selfish and self-interested, making us unable to think of anyone else but ourselves. Our responsibilities would be to simply follow the “ king’s” rules, or in a society like ours, simply follow the laws. Ultimately in Hobbes's ideal society people would have no freedom and one responsibility, with the exception of the king who is in charge of keeping order; thus making his/her rights and responsibilities flexible. He thought this was because, during the English revolution, the chaos was created because people opposed the leader, and instead disagreed with him and his ruling

Thomas Hobbes and John Locke have authored two works that have had a significant impact on political philosophy. In the “Leviathan” by Hobbes and “Two Treatises of Government” by Locke, the primary focus was to analyze human nature to determine the most suitable type of government for humankind. They will have confounding results. Hobbes concluded that an unlimited sovereign is the only option, and would offer the most for the people, while for Locke such an idea was without merit. He believed that the government should be limited, ruling under the law, with divided powers, and with continued support from its citizens. With this paper I will argue that Locke had a more realistic approach to identifying the human characteristics that

Hobbes perceives all men to be equal in that one may be strong enough to physically kill one that is weaker, but the weaker may be cunning or skilled enough to kill the stronger through manipulation or alliances with others. This is how Hobbes comes to the conclusion that all men are basically equal, even though their specific strengths may not be. Because of this, men’s hope for attaining what they want is also equal. Therefore, if two men want the same thing, and only one may have it, they compete, becoming enemies, leading them to attempt to put an end to each other (Hobbes, XIII).

According to Hobbes the state of nature leads to a war of all against all. What Hobbes refers to when he discusses the state of nature is a state in which there are no civil powers. To reach his conclusion about how the world would be in the state of nature, Hobbes first explains what human nature is and then explains the relationship between man and civil government.

Self-centered human nature drives men to egotism. Yet in a world of limited resources, as one man strives to satisfy his desires, he naturally diminishes other men’s opportunity to fulfill their own needs, thus creating Hobbes’ third premise: competition. In human nature, “From equality of ability ariseth equality of hope in the attaining of our ends. And therefore, if any two men desire the same thing, which nevertheless the cannot both enjoy, they become enemies; and . . . endeavour to destroy or subdue one another” (Hobbes 75). Men compete with one another to gratify their desires and thus become enemies. Consequently, competition begets jealousy, envy, and hatred, which sparks war among people. Hobbes’ three premises of human nature, equality, egotism, and competition, set the stage for an all out war.

While Hobbes works on an assumption that a person is not selfish or violent until they must interact with others this argument is one that is nearly pointless. It is impossible at this point in human evolution for us to be that alone. It is also hard to fathom in the span of human existence that such a state ever truly existed in nature. His basic argument is that this state of equality makes humans naturally distrustful and because of this distrust, they will end up going to war with one another. His thoughts on men going to war or quarreling with one another are easily summed up on page 185 of Leviathan "So that in the nature of man, we find three principall causes of quarrell. First, Competition; Secondly, Diffidence; Thirdly, Glory The first, maketh men invade for Gain; the second, for Safety; and the third, for Reputation." (Hobbes & Macpherson, 1968). Hobbes believes that this comes entirely out of the fact that all people are equal. It is in fact this argument that equality causes war that brings Hobbes to government. For the main purpose of government for him is to avoid this natural state of war. He says that "... it is manifest, that during the time men live without a common Power to keep them all in awe, they are in that

From this equality of ability ariseth equality of hope in the attaining of our ends. And therefore if any two men desire the same thing, which nevertheless they cannot both enjoy, they become enemies; and in the way to their end (which is principally their own conservation, and sometimes their delectation only) endeavor to destroy or subdue one another. (Hobbes 1615:5).

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

By definition, equality is the property that a set of things are the same in measure, value, and status. On the other hand, inequality represents the exact opposite of equality. This assessment is drawn from the works of Hobbes and Rousseau, whom despite addressing many of the same issues differed greatly on issues such as the state, human nature, and inequality, posing difficulty in telling who among the two represented a better view of those issues. A breakdown of the various works of both Hobbes and Rousseau will assist in examining the similarities and differences in their views on the three issues.