Preview

Hobbes Argument That Will Lead To A Social Contract And Government

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
1753 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Hobbes Argument That Will Lead To A Social Contract And Government
Looking to the science of the day, Hobbes determined that there was no soul and attempted to describe human nature as pure mechanics. Human nature was therefore driven by the need to satisfy the physical demands of the body and based on basic passions in life. These are to satisfy physical appetites, to seek power to maintain their wealth and to be superior to others by seeking glory. Hobbes saw the state nature as “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." The state of nature is anarchy, with constant violence (or potential violence) by amoral leaders terrorizing the population. Reason is the answer that will lead to a social contract and government. Individuals will give up their individual rights and freedoms to secure peace. Morality …show more content…

It is the artificial construct onto which the powers are conveyed by the social contract. The only limits to the sovereign’s powers are self-imposed, since it must exist outside of the population; although it should always strive for the good of the people to remain legitimate. Civil law is dictated by the sovereign. Civil law should be designed to promote well-being and progress for society with appropriate punishments for law breakers. Hobbes believed in an absolute monarchy. By making one man in charge, it would make it easy for the people to understand their roles and obey laws. With no confusing dissension or contrary views, people do not have to waste time and effort making political decisions; after all, that’s why they entered the social contract in the first place. He did not, however, believe in the ‘divine right’ or hereditary kings; the contract was conveyed upon an ancestor, which has no bearing on the legitimacy of the heir to …show more content…

The legislative determines the laws and may assign judicial, or magistrates, to exercise it. The executive is responsible for enforcing the laws and conducting foreign affairs. There should be a system of checks and balances between the two branches, to avoid despotism and illegitimate governments. Since a monarchy puts the power of both branches into one person, Locke believed all monarchies to be illegitimate forms of government. By advocating some form of representative or democratic government, society can insure that there representatives are working in their best interests. Despotism occurs when either of the two branches of government exceed their authority and begin acting against the benefit of the people. Civil society can then remove the offenders from office through their electoral process or agree to set up a new form of government. When the people are denied these means to choose their government, violent revolution may be the

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
  • Powerful Essays

    The text states, “be the proclaimed author of everything that their existing sovereign does and judges fit to be done….nothing the sovereign does can wrong any of his subjects, nor ought any of them to accuse him of injustice.” (Hobbes, 2004, p. 80) Hobbes believes that to avoid the state of nature, every man versus every man, an absolute sovereign must govern the people to ensure there are no disagreements. According to Hobbes the absolute sovereign is the starting point of all laws and is given this power by the citizens, the text states “the authority that has been given to ‘this man’ by every individual man in the commonwealth, he has conferred on him the use of so much power and strength that people’s fear of it enables him to harmonize and control the wills of them all.” The sovereign was chosen to represent the will of the people, and knows what is best for…

    • 1957 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Abraham Lincoln’s stance on abolition evolved. Initially, he was primarily concerned with preserving the Union, and his focus was on preventing the spread of slavery rather than outright abolition. However, as the Civil War progressed, his view shifted. He came to see the abolition of slavery as crucial both morally and strategically in winning the war and preserving the Union. While Lincoln may not have started as a staunch abolitionist, his actions as President indicate a growing commitment to ending slavery in the United States.…

    • 331 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Thomas Hobbes was an English philosopher of the 1600’s that tried to create a basis for politics. Having experienced the English civil war, Hobbes realized that the conflict was the result of human nature. Hobbes exclaimed that the world was full of greedy people and those who are selfless and care only for themselves. Without the government to maintain order, Hobbes said that there would be “a condition of war of everyone against everyone”. Hobbes noted that in order to stop this, the people would have to sacrifice their freedom for the government. In exchange, they gained law and order. He also notes that this sacrifice would allow the government to suppress any form of rebellion. Hobbes called this agreement the social contract.…

    • 123 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Throughout time, the ideas of democracy have changed with the help of many philosophers. Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu and Rousseau were four of the most important founders of the ideals of democracy. Through the Enlightenment Period, these thinkers began creating new ideas that would forever change the way governments are run through time. Our own American government reflects the ideas in some way or another of each of the philosophers we studied. Through new ideas, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau and Montesquieu all changed the way government was run with the innovative ideas they created.…

    • 507 Words
    • 3 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
  • Powerful Essays

    Hobbes talks about his view of Human Nature in his book The Leviathan. His central belief was built around the idea that the nature of humanity leads people to seek power. He believed that humans naturally desired the power to live well, and that human beings will never be satisfied with the power they currently possess unless they acquire more power. Hobbes defined power as” the ability to…

    • 1774 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Phil 103 Final

    • 1037 Words
    • 3 Pages

    1D. The state of nature is Hobbes’ description of what human beings lived like prior to the existence of a state or civilized society. In this existence, all humans were equal in that they all wanted to achieve their ultimate end and they all had the right to do what they thought necessary for survival…

    • 1037 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    In Hobbes’ mind humans are naturally violent and need to control to avoid any outbursts which would destroy social order (63). People with this thought process saw that the body in power should have complete authority over their subjects with no restraint on their power and no one being able to remove them from their throne. This however is setting a kingdom up for failure as even though some people can be prone to violence, oppressing them with a monarch that controls them too harshly or that are disinterested in ruing a kingdom can cause an even more violent uprising which is displayed in the French revolution. Nonetheless, having a government body put in power is necessary as humans do require leadership and social order but that same government body must be held accountable if there are caught doing any wrongdoings that could severely hinder the progress of the community or create arduous situations to their…

    • 1100 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Better Essays

    It is a brutish and violent nature. In the absence of culture, arts, science, reading or writing, humans, possibly, are more related to animals, since animals also live in the state of nature, and who always fight for domination. This rather negative view is Hobbe’s main reason why there should be a government. There should be an authority to establish peace. In peace, numerous achievements can be obtained. In peace does humanity progress. It might be argued that Hobbes demands a despot, an autocracy. Still, is not that better than the state of nature? There might be many opposing arguments especially that of the anarchists, yet Hobbe’s examples might not be conquered because they are succinct and feasible. They are plausibly impregnable because they are factual, not idealist. Leviathan does convincingly argue, and this monster in the state of nature does devour…

    • 1395 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    The legislative branch, or Congress is responsible for creating the laws of the nation, making it the most powerful branch of government. The executive branch holds the sole duty of enforcing the laws passed by Congress to ensure order in the nation, giving the branch its power. The Supreme court, or the judicial branch, interprets these laws made by Congress, they can declare laws unconstitutional thus checking the power of Congress. The Constitution gives equality to its citizens and the three branches of government, it limits powers and abilities as well as ensures the needs of the people, the three branches ensure the order of the nation and creates harmonization in the government and its…

    • 985 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan expressed his views of how the government should run the people they governed. Leviathan stated that the people should hand over their rights to one strong ruler. He believed that all humans were all naturally selfish and wicked and by having a ruler to have complete control over them, they will gain order and obedience. Thomas believed that without a strong ruler, people will constantly have war with one another and life would be “poor and short.” Hobbes called this agreement by which people created this type of government the “social contract”. In short, Hobbes believed that the best type of government was an absolute monarchy, which will impose order and demand obedience; a “sea monster” type of ruler to control the wicked people.…

    • 478 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    hobbes and kant

    • 1500 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Hobbes was a different kind of philosopher that had a very pessimistic view on humanity. In Hobbes’ book the Leviathan, he believed that humans were naturally nasty creatures and needed to be regulated in a society. For Hobbes one thing he also believed in was Utilitarianism, which is the desire for pleasure that drives our actions, basically, the most useful choice for your benefit. Hobbes had a theory that was called “the state of nature”, which in the eyes of Hobbes was life for humans before any kind of laws or governments. He says that the state of nature is a violent place with no lows. In the state of nature there is no business, no account of time, buildings, and there is always danger around the corner. For Hobbes the “state of nature” was a savage place that could only be fixed by laws, there is only peace when there is no war and no war is a place with laws. Hobbes came to the conclusion that humans cant live in groups without law. Hobbes was…

    • 1500 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Hobbes' Leviathan and Locke's Second Treatise of Government comprise critical works in the lexicon of political science theory. Both works expound on the origins and purpose of civil society and government. Hobbes' and Locke's writings center on the definition of the "state of nature" and the best means by which a society develops a systemic format from this beginning. The authors hold opposing views as to how man fits into the state of nature and the means by which a government should be formed and what type of government constitutes the best. This difference arises from different conceptions about human nature and "the state of nature", a condition in which the human race finds itself prior to uniting into civil society. Hobbes' Leviathan goes on to propose a system of power that rests with an absolute or omnipotent sovereign, while Locke, in his Treatise, provides for a government responsible to its citizenry with limitations on the ruler's powers. The understanding of the state of nature is essential to both theorists' discussions. For Hobbes, the state of nature is equivalent to a state of war. Locke's description of the state of nature is more complex: initially the state of nature is one of "peace, goodwill, mutual assistance and preservation". Transgressions against the law of nature, or reason which "teaches mankind that all being equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty and possessions," are but few. The state of nature, according to Locke's Treatise, consists of the society of man, distinct from political society, live together without any superior authority to restrict and judge their actions. It is when man begins to acquire property that the state of nature becomes somewhat less peaceful. At an undetermined point in the history of man, a people, while still in the state of nature, allowed one person to become their leader and judge over controversies. This was first the patriarch of a…

    • 3013 Words
    • 87 Pages
    Powerful 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