Hobbes: Human Nature and Political Philosophy Essay

Thomas Hobbes writes in his 1651 masterpiece Leviathan of his interpretations of the inherent qualities of mankind, and the covenants through which they get by in order to secure a peaceful existence. His book is divided up up into two separate sections Of Man, in which Hobbes describes characteristics of creation coexisting with show up the justification of a superior earthly authority, and Of Commonwealth, which explains how tenders trapped in that primordial ? domain of personality may escape and, through agreements, be equal to(p) to live peaceably among one another without fear of unjust actions cosmos taken against them.I too entrust discuss these elements of society as Hobbes intended them to be, with special emphasis on how sympathetic genius play a role in determining most of Hobbes basis for his regimenal theories. In the introduction to Leviathan, Hobbes casts a highly mechanized notion of humans by theorizing that they argon simply a motion of limbs and si mple machines that come together to take a crap a living, breathing, lay downing human.For what is the heart, but a reverberate and the nerves, but so umteen strings and the joints, but so many wheels, giving motion to the whole organic structure, 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 take a leak in a similar, mechanistic way. According to the text, specific wants and appetites produce within the human body and be 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 ship canal as we believe likely to relieve our discomfort, to preserve and promote our hurt got well-being. (Leviathan, Pt. I Ch. 6) Thus, basic every(prenominal)y everything we decide to do is determined by a natural desire to avoid things that give our bodies negati ve 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 provided by our strongest desires at that given cartridge holder and place. The report being introduced here is pivotal.It is the notion of self-preservation that in a state of nature in which in that location is no rule of law, and each man answers further to himself, mess will do (an are full entitled to do) anything they take for necessary to further their suffer existence. This animalistic view of human interaction yields Hobbes to conclude that each person (or grouping, such as a family) lives one by one from every other person or group, and acts in their own self-concern 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 combat in the state of nature which prevent man from entering into peace with one another. The first is competition, which springs 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 visit 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 preventive to conclude that human nature in this sense is essentially at rocious and evil.However, assuming that all humans are coherent individuals, Hobbes believes that mankind would course 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 tell as an irrational cause of conflict). By establishing a commonwealth, contends Hobbes, we essentially off 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 themselve s out from that condemnable 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 reserve for better means of self-preservation, because it creates an entity that can punish people who do not play by the game fairly. Also, people would be unable to assert on their individual autonomous powers in the effort to secure financial backing and happiness. Hobbes calls the necessary central authority the Sovereign (the institutional embodiment of an keen government), and those over whom it presides are the Subjects.Thus, Hobbes perception of human nature led him to wax his vision of an ideal form of rule that would govern these autonomous individuals. He believed that a supreme power w as required to keep men united, who would work to maintain the peace among the people as well as comfort them from foreign enemies. The people would have to make an agreement among themselves to all incline to this ruler. The people would then submit their wills to the will of their ruler who would in frolic assure their self-preservation, giving the ruler absolute control over his or her subjects.Assuming the people all do submit to this higher authority, the side by side(p) step is determining the most appropriate form this supreme entity must undertake. Hobbes offers three examples of governance in the text a monarchy, an aristocracy, and a democracy. Although the main(a) can be a legislature or an assembly of citizens or a monarch, claims Hobbes, the commonwealth will run smoothest under a inherited monarch, which to the reader sounds like an unusual choice given all the conditions of human nature previously mentioned.Hobbes defends this notion though, by explaining that i nvesting power in a single person who can choose advisors and rule systematically without fear of internal conflicts yields the best fulfillment of our social needs. (Leviathan, Pt. II Ch. 19) With a hereditary monarch there is hardly any internal conflict, whereas in a democracy, aristocracy, or any other assembly of citizens there is uninterrupted conflict among individuals trying to advance their own private agendas. Logistically, Hobbes says the sovereign will exercise its authority over its subjects in the form of civil laws that are either decreed or implicitly accepted.(Leviathan, Pt. II Ch. 26) Those who violate the laws pass on down will be appropriately punished by the sovereign authority. The end result of it all is the creation of the actual Leviathan biblically, a absurd sea creature, but in Hobbes scope, it was a metaphor for a fully functioning, healthy society. Just as he previously used references to the mechanistic view of how man functions to further explain t he conditions of how humankind and society work in general, Hobbes employs the use of metaphor to tie it all together.Imagine the sovereign ruler as literally the head of a man, not only the point at which the ideals of the society are created, but the commander of the equaliser of the body. The hands and limbs are the administrators of the law, whoever they may be under the various examples of government Hobbes previously offered. The subjects of the sovereign are the cells of the body that basically construct it and make it what it is, and allow for everything else to take place. Theres no doubt that Hobbes view on human nature shaped the way his political theories were formed.His works were, and still are highly influential to political philosophers that followed after him, which allowed for further, more concise theories to be generated and debated. And despite the shortcomings of some of Hobbes philosophies (such as the feasibility of instal such a government under the premi ses offered), his work was new for its time and laid the foundation on which other later noteworthy philosophers built their political ideologies.