- Term Papers and Free Essays

Hobbes: Human Nature And Political Philosophy

Essay by   •  November 16, 2010  •  1,490 Words (6 Pages)  •  1,918 Views

Essay Preview: Hobbes: Human Nature And Political Philosophy

Report this essay
Page 1 of 6

Hobbes: Human Nature and Political Theory

Thomas Hobbes writes in his 1651 masterpiece Leviathan of his interpretations of the inherent qualities of mankind, and the covenants through which they enter in order to secure a peaceful existence. His book is divided up into two separate sections; Of Man, in which Hobbes describes characteristics of humans coexisting without the protection of a superior earthly authority, and Of Commonwealth, which explains how humans trapped in that primal Ð''state of nature' may escape and, through agreements, be able to live peaceably among one another without fear of unjust actions being taken against them. I too will discuss these elements of society as Hobbes intended them to be, with special emphasis on how human nature played a role in determining most of Hobbes' basis for his political theories.

In the introduction to Leviathan, Hobbes casts a highly mechanized view of humans by theorizing that they are simply a motion of limbs and simple machines that come together to produce a living, breathing, working human. "For what is the heart, but a spring; and the nerves, but so many strings; and the joints, but so many wheels, giving motion to the whole body, such as was intended by the Artificer?" (Leviathan, Introduction) Although this is a depiction of how Hobbes views the dynamics of the human body, he contends that human actions work in a similar, mechanistic way. According to the text, specific wants and appetites produce within the human body and are experienced as discomforts or pains (or to be more general, degrees of happiness or sadness) which must be overcome. Thus, each person is geared to act in such ways as we believe likely to relieve our discomfort, to preserve and promote our own well-being. (Leviathan, Pt. I Ch. 6) Thus, basically everything we decide to do is determined by a natural desire to avoid things that give our bodies negative feedback responses, and the opposite for things which our body tells us is good. Essentially, in this aspect Hobbes asserts that human decisions in this environment are guided only by our strongest desires at that given time and place.

The idea being introduced here is pivotal. It is the notion of self-preservation; that in a state of nature in which there is no rule of law, and each man answers only to himself, people will do (an are fully entitled to do) anything they deem necessary to further their own existence. This animalistic view of human interaction yields Hobbes to conclude that each person (or grouping, such as a family) lives independently from every other person or group, and acts in their own self-interest without regard for others. Hobbes calls this a "state of war", in which life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." (Leviathan, Pt. I Ch. 13)

Hobbes later identifies three main causes of conflict in the state of nature which prevent man from entering into peace with one another. The first is competition, which makes people invade for their personal gain. The second is diffidence (distrust) which makes people invade out of fear; a mutual sense of insecurity forces one to anticipate an attack from someone they cannot trust (who likewise feels the same way), so pre-emptive measures are taken. This makes sense because one renders it better to be a surprisor, and not a surprisee, since being surprised meant an almost certain death. The last cause of conflict is glory, which makes people invade others for their own merit. Knowing these sources of problems, Hobbes then declares; "Hereby it is manifest, 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 if of every man, against every man." (Leviathan, Pt. I Ch. 13) Therefore, at this point it is safe to conclude that human nature in this sense is essentially dangerous and evil. However, assuming that all humans are rational individuals, Hobbes believes that mankind would naturally want to escape this hellish state of existence and live under agreements that ensure the rational causes of quarrel could be avoided (albeit the third cause of quarrel, glory, is noted as an irrational cause of conflict). By establishing a commonwealth, contends Hobbes, we essentially remove the structural causes of conflict and foster the conditions for humankind to prosper under its own benevolence through mutually beneficial agreements. (Leviathan, Pt. I Ch. 14)

Although Hobbes had indicated that the state of nature is horrific, he acknowledges the counter-argument that people might not want to leave it because they would have to surrender certain rights granted to them solely while in the state of nature. But Hobbes' response is rather simple; for it is "the foresight of their own preservation, and of a more contented life thereby; that is to say, of getting themselves out from that miserable condition of war which is necessarily consequent, as hath been shown, to the natural passions of men when there is no visible power to keep them in awe, and tie them by fear of punishment to the performance of their covenants." (Leviathan, Pt. 2 Ch. 17) What he is saying is that rational individuals would understand that life under a common authority would allow for better means of self-preservation, because it creates an entity that can punish people who



Download as:   txt (8.8 Kb)   pdf (107.1 Kb)   docx (11.9 Kb)  
Continue for 5 more pages »
Only available on