Pros And Cons Of Hobbes Right Of Nature
Hobbes’ right of nature states that no individual should be expected to follow the rules of those in control if that means that person is not obligated to put themselves in a state of harm or to give up their right for something or somebody else (115). Moreover, for an individual to give up their right to something takes away from their own independence, therefore, they do not necessarily have to commit to a task or a promise if that puts them into a state in which they are giving up their own right. With this, certain acts should be voluntary ones in which that person wants to do that task, but they are not putting themselves into a controversial position such as harm or giving up their right. If a person is to commit to something voluntarily,
…show more content…
With this, God is the ultimate ruler and individuals should remember that God is one that can decide an individual’s fate and bring justice down on them if a wrongful act were to be committed. However, laws by the sovereign are created to keep the peace and to ensure that less individuals are harmed, however, a man should not be punished in a way that harms him and takes away from his individual right (173).
A second perspective of the law of nature involves that which an individual cannot perform certain acts in which is destructive for themselves. Moreover, fate is that which determines when death is upon an individual and they cannot change their own fate and cause their death earlier than it should be. Too, an individual does not have to fight another individual in the case that they fear hurting themselves for they are not obligated to put themselves in this position and can rightfully decline such an …show more content…
All parts of society are expected to follow certain social norms as well as act in accordance with respect to people’s rights of liberty and safety. Therefore, all members should behave as expected to function correctly as a society and higher members are expected to take certain precautions when unlawful acts are committed. However, no danger or extreme harm should come to that individual and everybody should be treated
With this, God is the ultimate ruler and individuals should remember that God is one that can decide an individual’s fate and bring justice down on them if a wrongful act were to be committed. However, laws by the sovereign are created to keep the peace and to ensure that less individuals are harmed, however, a man should not be punished in a way that harms him and takes away from his individual right (173).
A second perspective of the law of nature involves that which an individual cannot perform certain acts in which is destructive for themselves. Moreover, fate is that which determines when death is upon an individual and they cannot change their own fate and cause their death earlier than it should be. Too, an individual does not have to fight another individual in the case that they fear hurting themselves for they are not obligated to put themselves in this position and can rightfully decline such an …show more content…
All parts of society are expected to follow certain social norms as well as act in accordance with respect to people’s rights of liberty and safety. Therefore, all members should behave as expected to function correctly as a society and higher members are expected to take certain precautions when unlawful acts are committed. However, no danger or extreme harm should come to that individual and everybody should be treated