...CHAP. II. the State of Nature. Sec. 4. TO understand political power right, and derive it from its original, we must consider, what state all men are naturally in, and that is, a state of perfect freedom to order their actions, and dispose of their possessions and persons, as they think fit, within the bounds of the law of nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the will of any other man. A state also of equality, wherein all the power and jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another; there being nothing more evident, than that creatures of the same species and rank, promiscuously born to all the same advantages of nature, and the use of the same faculties, should also be equal one amongst another without subordination or subjection, unless the lord and master of them all should, by any manifest declaration of his will, set one above another, and confer on him, by an evident and clear appointment, an undoubted right to dominion and sovereignty. Sec. 5. This equality of men by nature, the judicious Hooker looks upon as so evident in itself, and beyond all question, that he makes it the foundation of that obligation to mutual love amongst men, on which he builds the duties they owe one another, and from whence he derives the great maxims of justice and charity. His words are, "The like natural inducement hath brought men to know that it is no less their duty, to love others than themselves; for seeing those things which are equal, must needs all have...
Words: 2846 - Pages: 12
...Sample Exam Question: Why does Hobbes describe the state of nature as a state of war? Before answering the question why Hobbes describes the state of nature as a state of war it is to be clarified what is meant by those two terms. For Hobbes, as pictured in his work “Leviathan”, the “state of nature” is the condition before the foundation of the state. In this condition of anarchy, literally everybody has the freedom to do everything he wants. The state of nature is also a “condition of war a war of every one against every one” (p. 189). For Hobbes, “war” is not only the situation of actual battle, but also the immediate thread that a battle might occur (p. 186). Analyzing Hobbes’ argumentation, one can find three main reasons why the state of nature is a state of war: 1. Men are motivated to use force, 2. Literally every man is able to do so, 3. Nobody hinders them therein. As for the motivation, Hobbes identifies three main reasons to use force (p. 185): The first is “competition” to gain something that belongs to someone else – such as his wife, cattle, land, etc. The second reason is “diffidence”, or the will to violently defend something from a competitor. The third cause of quarrel is “glory”: men seek reputation and therefore fight over even the most insignificant things, such as words, a smile, etc. The second condition why Hobbes identifies the state of nature as a state of war is that men are always able to use force as a means of resolving conflict...
Words: 590 - Pages: 3
...Hobbes and Rousseau are similar, and yet different to another, on aspects of the state of nature, and yet different in other ways. The way Hobbes views the state of nature, is that of natural man in the wild, who is constantly fighting other individuals for survival, and doing whatever he can and whatever means are necessary, to fend off others for his own survival. That in the state of nature, man’s life is constantly in a fight for survival. That in this situation, it is not possible at any level to obtain a government, let alone have peace from others’ thefts, murders, etc. this becomes more obvious, the more one analyzes what Hobbes is saying. That “natural man”, only survives due to that unto which contracts are made with one another,...
Words: 1877 - Pages: 8
...the state of nature as a state of war of everyone against everyone. (pg310) Everyone would be looking out for themselves and making sure they were safe and provided for. The idea that there would be no such thing as just or unjust cannot be true and would not work. Murder, theft, or assault would still be “unjust” but would not be properly handled since there is no authority. People will take it amongst themselves to handle the situation and apply their own justice to the offender. It would be chaotic since there is no regulation to any of the punishments. Since there would be wars nonstop with everyone wanting to come out as the victor,...
Words: 1013 - Pages: 5
...The Grapes of Wrath directed by John Ford is a 1940 film based on the Pulitzer winning novel by John Steinbeck. It tells the story of the Joads who during the Great Depression in the 1930s were run off their farm in Oklahoma. The film details their journey to California in search of work and a new beginning for their family. This paper will relate the main character Tom Joad to the philosophies of Thomas Hobbes and his theory of the state of nature and government as an artificial creation, and Jim Casy to Jean Jacques Rousseau’s theory of government and society as inhibitors of our natural freedoms. The Grapes of Wrath Tom Joad, played by Henry Fonda in the 1940 drama film Grapes of Wrath, is the main character who opens the movie returning to his home in Oklahoma after serving four years in prison for manslaughter. On the way he runs into Jim Casy, the former preacher who warns Tom that most sharecroppers have been evicted due to the effects of the depression. Once finding his family’s farm deserted, he finds them at his uncle’s farm preparing to also leave the next day for California in hopes of finding work and a brighter future. As they begin their treacherous journey across Route 66, the Joads and Casy endure many hardships. Grandpa, who didn’t want to leave his land, dies and is buried alongside the road. Then they run into a man who informs them that there is no work in California, but with not feeling they had any other options, they carry on with hope that they...
Words: 1244 - Pages: 5
...Hobbes looked at society not as a unit but as many individuals, he goes on to say that the single largest fear is that of a violent death which would come about from another individual. In order to avoid this, individuals will try to further their self-preservation through three methods: diffidence, competition and glory. Whereby diffidence leads to man avoiding man, the prime source of a violent death. Competition over essential resources in order to preserve ones body and glory where one will show off their strength and intellect in order to try and scare off other individuals. Hobbes says these methods rather than avoid violence, actually lead to increased violence and the individuals in such a society are trapped in a worsening spiral of...
Words: 369 - Pages: 2
...existing in several forms and elaborates on them instead of just choosing to frame a single definition and direction of autonomy. Young's opinion on feminism seems to be a little exaggerated and Rousseau's idea of a natural state of humanity is intriguing, but I cannot imagine living in a society without government and yet still enjoying the security and technology of the modern world. Philosopher Rousseau believes that humans become more equal with the removal of barriers and expansion of freedom, and this freedom is truly present only in the state of nature, where humans are not compared with each other and...
Words: 1445 - Pages: 6
...They have questioned the state of nature and the manner in which this affects government and sovereignty. Among these prominent thinkers was Thomas Hobbes, author of Leviathan, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, author of The Social Contract. Both philosophers raised many brilliant questions, shedding light upon the fundamental manner in which we regard the realm of politics. Both dominant intellectual figures wrote these texts with the central aim to highlight the necessary conditions for the subsistence of a society and ideal governing body. While they share some perspectives, such as the idea that men are equal in their physical and mental abilities, their views differ on the state of nature, and by implication differ in the understanding of the foundations and legitimacy of the social contract and sovereignty. In order to comprehend the disparity between political thought, we must first understand a primary idea, the state of nature, and how each man defines it. Only then will we comprehend the execution of their ideas and the radical dissimilarity between Hobbes and...
Words: 559 - Pages: 3
...Thomas Hobbes and John Locke share similar but different views in regards to the “state of nature”. They both believe that man is created equal and take the similar stance that there should be a governing body to execute laws that have been placed upon citizens. Hobbes appears to believe that if people are left to themselves, people will only think of themselves, are not trustworthy and are constantly concerned about death at the hands of others. Locke seems to believe that even though people may only be concerned about themselves, that logic keeps people from selfish behavior. Hobbes overall view in the stat of nature is that it turns in a war based on people's self centered and violent impulses. Hobbes believed that “every man is an enemy...
Words: 466 - Pages: 2
...The Works of Thomas Hobbes The moral and political philosophy of Thomas Hobbes is very different from those of the ancients, specifically Aristotle. As a thinker during the Scientific Revolution, his picture of morality is framed in science. And while science is usually thought of to have no opinion about questions of right and wrong, Hobbes would argue otherwise. He wanted to move moral and political philosophy into the realm of science, where answers can—and should— come from science and reason, and away from the monopoly over human values held by religious texts. Furthermore, he called for a powerful, civil authority to combat what he called “the state of nature (Leviathan).” It may seem normal to define morality and science as entirely separate from each other, that is, to say that science can help explain why we may value certain things, but it can never determine what we should value. However, Hobbes sees an overlap between facts and values and attempts to use empirical answers to help figure out philosophical problems. This idea of applying facts to issues of good and evil rests upon the notion that questions such as “What is truly worth living for?...Or even dying for?” “What is morality?” and “What is a ‘good’ life?” have answers. Hobbes would say that they do, and with good reason. Questions like “What food is healthy?” or “What exercises are best?” are much like moral questions because it is difficult to find an exact answer due to the many different, correct...
Words: 1343 - Pages: 6
...What is it that binds mankind together? What force exists that can take such a diverse and unique population and subject all of said population to its will? Natural law is meant to be a standard rule which applies to the entirety of mankind and naturally such a thing (if indeed there is such a thing) has been a topic that many philosophers have discussed since the beginning and have well…naturally come to their own conclusions about. St. Thomas Aquinas, Thomas Hobbes, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are such philosophers and have worked a great deal with this exact topic. St. Thomas Aquinas understands natural law simply as the rational participation in what he calls the eternal law (the laws of the physical world around...
Words: 568 - Pages: 3
...Leviathan Hobbes defines trust as “an opinion of the veracity of man.” In the writing of The Elements of Law, trust is illustrated as “a passion of the mind, which consists in the absence of doubts about the trustworthiness of the trusted person, which is the belief that she intends no other plans than the ones she pretends to have.” Lastly, Hobbes continues his idea trust in the writing of De Cieve, stating that there is a distant “difference between “an ‘agreement’, where trust is present and allows the postponement of the performance of what is promised, and the ‘contract, where there is no trust and when both parties perform immediately.” These accounts demonstrates the foundations of trust being the relationship between faith and human nature and the forming connection between the two concepts. To understand this formation of trust, one must understand that Hobbes’s opinions and insights grew out of a neoRoman account of slavery, being reflected in the Hobbes approach of trust originates from the transformation of the fundamentals of neoRoman view of service. Which he later inherited from English thinkers Brackton and Coke, which, Hobbes’s adapted for the development of his own political and philosophical purposes. Hobbes’s...
Words: 2320 - Pages: 10
...one another and established the first sovereign states. For both theorists the period before the institution of a social contract, what they call the "state of nature", is important in understanding what form this first government took and what rights or liberties it was meant to protect. The state of nature is a time in which primitive humans roamed the earth without regard for what we now consider laws or social customs. While not a scientific study of social or biological evolution by any means, in fact both Hobbes and Rousseau admit the State of Nature may very well have never existed, it is an important concept of abstract political theory that enables us to debate the role human nature plays in the formation of governments and how these governments can better serve the people who institute them. Hobbes describes our natural state, in his treatise Leviathan, as one of equality. By this he does not mean moral or social equality, he is referring only to physical equality. He says, "Nature hath made men so equal, in the faculties of body, and mind."(Hobbes 68) He adds that on occasion one may be stronger or smarter than another, however, "when all is reckoned together, the difference between man, and man, is not as considerable as that one man can thereupon claim to himself any benefit, to which another may not pretend, as well as him."(Hobbes 68) What he means by this is that no one is safe from anyone else in the state of nature. Even if one is weaker than another, the weak...
Words: 2642 - Pages: 11
...Comparing Thomas Hobbes and John Locke’s views concerning what life is like in a state of nature, we can see that the two-theorist’s share opposite views in making an assumption of what the state of nature is like. Thomas Hobbes’ views include pessimistic views of nature and how its effects can influence man to selfishly consider what he would need to do to secure his safety while John Locke presents a natural concept that assumes there is a universal thought of good that man is aware of. Attempting to justify the role of government or justice by understanding the state of nature can be somewhat accurate and can be considered for such purposes, but may fail to answer some aspects of society overall and leave other things unanswered. In regards...
Words: 3320 - Pages: 14
...representatives presenting the problems of the common person would prevent a king from being unfair and cruel. Hobbes originates the phrase 'Voice of the people' meaning one person could be chosen to represent a group with similar views. Legitimacy of government Hobbes was a dedicated materialist. The views that got him in trouble were related to this, as Hobbes claimed to believe in God, but believed that since only the material universe existed, God must be a material being, just one with great powers. Hobbes sought legitimacy for government not founded in religion, because his sort of religion wasn't what most Christians would regard as Christianity. He also saw that a new source of legitimacy for the state was needed, because kings and priests had been working very hard at...
Words: 1136 - Pages: 5
