Preview

Hobbes and Butler on Human Nature

Powerful Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1632 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Hobbes and Butler on Human Nature
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) and Joseph Butler (1692-1752) hold contrasting views on how to build a human society. For Hobbes the most important issue is to achieve and maintain peace, and points out, that men ought to give up their natural rights and transfer them to a sovereign. For Butler the best way is to follow the rules of God which are already inside of every man’s soul. The two both start with an account of human nature: Hobbes notes that it is lead by appetites and aversions and results in selfish individuals; Butler argues that man is born to virtue, so that every human being is naturally benevolent and has an inborn motivation to love and help others. In the pages that follow I shall refer to different arguments by Hobbes and Butler to understand each other’s conceptions on human society.

Hobbes’s conception of the will

The will is a very problematic term in Hobbes’s moral philosophy. Round 1640 it was the subject of fierce debates with the Bishop of Derry, John Bramhall, and eighty years later received harsh criticism from Joseph Butler. Hobbes’s main idea is that there is no such thing as ‘free will,’ regarded by Bramhall as the faculty of the rational soul to act or not, depend on moral considerations (Bramhall, vol. 4, p. 290, Russell, p. 5). What we call the will, insists Hobbes, is merely the last appetite or aversion that moves us to act: “In deliberation, the last appetite, or aversion, immediately adhering to the action, or to the omission thereof, is that we call the WILL, the act (not the faculty) of willing. And beasts that have deliberation must necessarily also have will.” (Leviathan, p. 33).
This phrase of Hobbes can be seen as a summary of all his views on man as a moral agent in building a peaceful society. In his definition of ‘deliberation’ as ‘the whole sum of desires, aversions, hopes and fears’, we can find two important features: (1) deliberation and reason are not equivalent, and (2) deliberation is not an exclusive faculty



Bibliography: Bramhall, John. The Works of the most Reverend Father in God, John Bramhall. Oxford: John Henry Parker, 1844, vol. IV. Butler, Joseph. Five Sermons Preached at the Rolls Chapel and A Dissertation upon the Nature of Virtue. New York: The Liberal Arts Press, 1950. Hobbes, Thomas. The Elements of Law, Natural and Politic: To Which Are Subjoined Selected Extracts from Unprinted Mss. of Thomas Hobbes. Edited by Ferdinand Tönnies. London: Simpkin, Marshall and Company, 1889. Electronic version retrieved from: http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/toc/modeng/public/Hob2Ele.html Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. Edited by Edwin Curley. Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 1994. Russell, Paul. “Hobbes, Bramhall, and the Free Will Problem”. Retrieved from: philpapers.org/rec/RUSHBA.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    After analyzing how Locke and Hobbes understand the state of nature it is evident that they share many ideas but they also show essential differences in their ideas. Hobbes regards the state of nature as a state of war, in which natural law is established only after a process of reasoning. This process leads men to the conclusion that they must somehow find…

    • 397 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes, an Enlightenment philosopher, claimed that mankind is naturally evil and selfish and will cause conflicts “if any two men desire the same thing, which they nevertheless cannot both enjoy” or have differing opinions, in order to gain more power so that they can freely pursue their selfish desires, especially “during the time men live without a common power” and “in that condition which is called war, every man against every man,” and are therefore incapable of self-governing. Hobbes’ position on human nature is easily observable; intolerance and bigotry causes violence and general public…

    • 1210 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    Exegesis of Thomas Hobbes

    • 761 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes was an Englishman who wrote the Leviathan during the English Civil War in the 17th century. Naturally Hobbes spends chapter five, and most of the Leviathan describing how to avoid internal conflict. Hobbes argues that by using logical reasoning and eliminating disagreement a state can avoid internal conflict. Hobbes begins chapter five with a definition for reason and the operations that are involved. Hobbes continues his explanation of reason by describing the proper use of reasoning and how absurdity arises. He elaborates on errors and absurdities, explicitly their causes. Hobbes ends chapter five with his description of the connection between reason and science.…

    • 761 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes was a philosopher who saw humans as a purely physical being. He believed that all human actions can be explained through the motions in our bodies. According to Hobbes all feelings and emotions are a result of phantasms, our perception of the objects around us. This perception is a motion within our bodies and each person perceives these phantasms differently causing love, hate, desires, and what we think is good and bad. Every feeling that comes from ones perspective has a physical feeling, such as desires can cause certain pains and it is only human nature that one does whatever is needed in order to relieve those pains. Hobbes therefore sees humans as being able, by their state of nature, to take or do whatever necessary for themselves even if it shows no regard for the other people their actions may harm. This inevitably would end up in a fight for survival or “the war of all against all”. In order to prevent such a war from happening Hobbes thought it necessary that the individuals must promise each other to give up their right to govern themselves to the sovereign for the mutual benefit of the people. This sovereign then has absolute power to rule with no questions asked and not to only act on behalf of the citizens but to completely embody their will. In summation, Hobbes believed that society could only exist under power of the sovereign and that life in the state of nature is violent, short and brutish, as all men act on self-interest.…

    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    That men are sinister in the State of Nature could be promoted as a headline to Hobbes’s magnum opus, Leviathan. In the state of nature, men are not magnanimous beings. A notion similar to the first sin, yet different from a philosopher like Jean Jacque Rousseau. It has always been taken for granted that there are wicked and virtuous humans, yet for Hobbes, humans are innately wicked. These notions, however abstract and contradictory they may seem, are demonstrated in this short paper; Hobbes’s chapter 13 of Leviathan is abridged in this paper. First, the inclinations that drive men to behave in a wicked way are outlined step by step. Then Hobbes’s reason for having a common power is established. Generally, this paper is a reflection on Chapter 13 of Leviathan with explanation and commentary.…

    • 1395 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Better Essays

    Thomas Hobbes was one of the most controversial philosophers of all time. He argued that the, “Life of man [is] solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Hobbes 77). Clearly he didn’t think that humanity was a good group of beings. In the Lord of the Flies by William Golding, one character, Jack Merridew, displays many characteristics of Hobbes’ philosophy on man. Time after time, Golding subtly refers to Hobbes’ philosophy through Jack and his reactions with other characters in the book.…

    • 1000 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    The argument presented by Thomas Hobbes in chapter 13 of Leviathan, is that the state of nature is a state of war of all against all. Such a view had previously been discussed- earlier versions of the argument appear in other significant works- however it is Hobbes account of a state in “continuall feare of danger and violent death”1 upon which I will focus on and critique in this essay. There are many reasons why many seem to regard Hobbes argument as the most accurate portrayal of a pre-civilised society, many believe it to be so straightforward and seemingly correct that to object it would be to ignore a necessary truth. Secondly, those who accept Hobbes’ view of a human nature that is so egotistical and unforgiving, would seemingly too agree to the assumption of a gloomy, unbearable state of nature. In this essay I shall argue that such opinions are not logically justified as Hobbes’s argument holds its foundations solidly in assumption alone, an assumption that was heavily moulded on his surroundings of a savage Civil War. Hobbes’s argument lies solely on the grounds that human beings are intrinsically wicked and self-centred beings an argument that cannot be completely validated and therefore cannot be a ‘necessary truth’. Yet despite holding such a bleak outlook on the human condition and its simple invalidity the work of Thomas Hobbes still shapes the political word today2 and it continues to impact our understanding of human nature and interactions. In order to justify my critique of Hobbes I will begin by presenting both his original argument and a brief view of some modern interpretations before cross examining their conclusions against that of other social contract theorist such as Locke and Rousseau as well as rational logic to present the argument that the state of nature is most certainly not a state of war of all against all.…

    • 3361 Words
    • 9 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    As Hobbes’ continually points out, in a state of nature, fear is the most antagonizing force that a man produces to be used against others to perpetuate a state of constant war. It is this fear, along with the struggle for as much power as possible (which Hobbes establishes that it is men’s reasoning to do so) that creates the balance beam act which acts as the driving force for men to seek each other out and pursue peace. This pursuit for peace amongst themselves is not only instigated for the greater good of themselves, but also society as a whole, whereby in realizing the interconnectedness of their fellow peoples, men consent to the “social contract” that Hobbes’ presents.…

    • 544 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Pros And Cons Of Hobbes

    • 755 Words
    • 4 Pages

    4. Hobbes viewed human nature as being inherently troubled. He believed that our nature made man continually try to become better than everyone else so that there would be “no other power great enough to endanger him” (pg. 208). Hobbes argued that our human nature keeps us at continual war with one another, particularly when there isn’t a common authority to keep us all in check. Hobbes also believed that two people would become enemies when they desired the same thing, they will aim to destroy the other (pg. 207) in an effort to attain glory.…

    • 755 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    John Locke and Thomas Hobbes were two important philosophers from the seventeenth century. The two were born nearly 50 years apart – Hobbes in 1588 and Locke in 1632 – and yet, they each managed to have a major impact on their time and our own. The philosophical viewpoints of Locke and Hobbes are, in most cases, in strict opposition of each other. There are certain points at which the theories of both men collide; however, their synonymous beliefs are exactly the point at which their theories begin to diverge again.…

    • 1074 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Locke Vs Hobbes

    • 1458 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were two of the great political theorists of their time. Both created great philosophical texts that help to describe the role of government in man’s life, as well as their views of man’s state of nature. Even though both men do have opposite views on many of their political arguments, the fact that they are able to structure their separate ideologies on the state of man in nature is the bond that connects them. Both men look toward the creation of civil order in order to protect not only the security of the individual, but also the security of the state.…

    • 1458 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Locke Synthesis

    • 566 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The natural state of humanity promotes personal freedom and rights with the demand of peace. They are born inherently good and in a “state of perfect freedom.”1 The law of nature is the primitive law of life that creates personal rights. The law of nature protects people’s freedoms and keeps them under a code. While individuals are born inherently good, moderate greed is included in the law of nature as a way for “[man] to preserve himself” and to “preserve the rest of mankind.”2 The individual is put before all of mankind because mankind cannot survive without the individual. While the individual is the most important there are restrictions to protect each man’s freedom. The law of nature Hobbes creates a state of nature where each man fights and survives for himself. In Hobbes’s state of nature there is no way for each man to thrive. Locke believes that not all men are evil and sets the law of nature to be livable for all individuals. Locke does not follow Hobbes’s brutal state of nature by not allowing men to violate the rights of other individuals.…

    • 566 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes argues that the state of nature is a state of perpetual war of all against all and consequently, the life of man in the state of nature "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short" (xiii, 9). In this paper I will explain Hobbes' arguments that support his claim to the state of nature. I will also assess these arguments and state that they are not valid and, therefore, not sound. I will then talk about the most controversial premise, relative scarcity of goods, and how Hobbes would respond to the objections of this premise. I will then talk about his response to this objection being unsuccessful. Finally, I will assess whether it will be possible to leave the state of nature given the factors Hobbes describes that create the state of nature. I will show that Hobbes' argument on how men will leave the state of nature is a valid and sound argument.…

    • 1062 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    John Locke Vs Hobbes

    • 750 Words
    • 3 Pages

    The ethics, morals, rights and ways humanity governs has always been under scrutiny. Throughout history the correct way to govern, both internally and externally has been questioned by philosopher. However, two have stood apart. Two great philosophers, Thomas Hobbes and John Lock, had two very different theories that have swung back and forth through people’s minds. Complete opposites that are grouped in one major debate that has only been named only recently, one that has been raging as long as humanity itself, Hobbes vs. Locke.…

    • 750 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays