Hobbes, Hume and Human Nature
The essence of human nature has been questioned time and time again throughout history. Because of this uncertainty many have theorized about what the essence or driving force might be. These thoughts were so influential and believed to be so true, that they were interpreted into political documents. David Hume (1711-1776) and Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) were two very influential people in regards to human nature. Thomas Hobbes felt more negatively than David Hume. Their views were extremely powerful when looking at yourself and how you view your own motives.
Thomas Hobbes was extremely influential in his view on human nature. This way of thinking entailed that people were born with the original sin given to us by Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden. People are supposedly all drawn to war, with envy and are very selfish at our core. This relation is shown through his belief in the State of Nature: that all people were born depraved, brutal, selfish and drawn to war. He liked to call this, the war of all against all.
Hobbes writes in Of the State of Men without Civil Society that human kind can be "reduced unto four kinds; bodily strength, experience, reason passion." Hobbes thinks that living in a civil society goes against our nature. "We do not seek society for its own sake, but that we may receive some honour and profit from it;.." This makes sense looking at his negative views on humanity as a whole. We would like to think that we want to join civil society and be sociable but Hobbes feels this is not the case. If I were to embody Hobbe's views I would have to question my morality and wonder if it's a matter of internal character or external restraint. Meaning that I would be unsure whether I was joining society for the sake of being morally just or because I actually felt that joining society was the right thing.
To see society as not of my internal belief I wonder why I join. Hobbes would argue that...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document