Preview

Hobbes Relationship With Nature

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
418 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Hobbes Relationship With Nature
Because Hobbes argues that the relationship between people in nature is similar to the animal. And thus the safety of survival has become an important purpose of the people. He considers the so-called natural rights: "the liberty each man hath to use his own power as he will himself for the preservation of his own nature, that is to say, of his own life; and consequently of doing anything which in his own judgment and reason he shall conceive to be the aptest means thereunto."(Leviathan, 4.1) To summarize it, Hobbes is saying that if people will do everything to make sure they can stay alive. In another word, people will be unscrupulous to achieve their goal. "...and there is nothing he can make use of that may not be a help unto him in preserving his …show more content…
"The reason why men enter into society, is the preservation of their property."(The Two Treaties, 9.222) To sum up, Hobbes's natural state is full of fear and chaos. Mankind by nature is evil but still dominated by reason. People are there to save themselves, desire for security, want to get rid of this terrible circumstances and seek a peaceful and orderly life. Therefore, people have entered into a social contract with each other, and agree to give up the original natural rights, give all the rights to a sovereign. Although Locke's state of nature is a peaceful, orderly, equal and free state under the domination of natural law, its natural state is not perfect and defective. "...in the state of nature he hath such a right, yet the enjoyment of it is very uncertain, and constantly exposed to the invasion of others..."(9.123) According to Locke, in the state of nature, everyone has the power to implement law of nature and violate the right to punishment of the law of nature, and not a clearly defined law as a standard. There is no uniform enforcer and sanctions, will inevitably lead to social confusion and disordered.

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    At first sight, Locke’s The Second Treatise of Government, seemed quite similar to Hobbes’s Leviathan. They both believed that a state of nature is a state that exist without government. They believe that men are created equal in this state, however Hobbes argues that because of self-preservation, man possessed the desire to control over other man. Locke, on the other hand, reasons with a more peaceful and pleasant place.…

    • 789 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good 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

    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

    HIST Assignment 1

    • 1167 Words
    • 3 Pages

    “Life, liberty, and property” are the main ideas of Locke’s natural law theory. Locke claims that “The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges everyone; and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind who will but consult it that, being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm one another in his life, health, liberty, or possession…” (SB, 35). According to Locke, in the state of nature, there is a set of universal law which depends on human reason and human nature. Every human being is naturally equal and free under any circumstance. The law educates all human beings to live in one livable community where everyone should treat others equally and peacefully. In addition, no one should destroy or control other human lives such as having them as servants for one business. Every member in the community should join together into one group for their amicable life and in order to maintain a civil society.…

    • 1167 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    For Hobbes, the need of an outright power, as a Sovereign, took after from the utter ruthlessness of the State of Nature. The State of Nature was totally grievous, thus objective men would will to submit themselves even to outright power with a specific end goal to escape it. For John Locke, 1632-1704, the State of Nature is an altogether different sort of spot, thus his contention concerning the social contract and the way of men's relationship to power are subsequently entirely distinctive. While Locke uses Hobbes' methodological gadget of the State of Nature, as do for all intents and purposes all social contract scholars, he utilizes it to a very distinctive end. Locke's contentions for the social contract, and for the privilege of residents…

    • 152 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    When it comes to State of Nature, Locke writes in his Two Treatises of Government,“...a state of perfect freedom of acting and disposing of their own possessions and persons as they think fit within the bounds of the law of nature...The natural state is also one of equality in which all power and jurisdiction is reciprocal...” (Lonang Institute; State of Nature §4). Men are freely allowed to do whatever is necessary as long as there are justifications for their actions and to see that everyone around them is just as equal as themselves. Along with his State of Nature is Locke’s belief of Social Contact: “individuals in a state of nature would be bound morally, by the Law of Nature, not to harm each other in their lives or possession… individuals would agree to form a state that would provide a "neutral judge"...an impartial, objective agent of that self-defense, rather than each man acting as his own judge, jury, and executioner...”(Social Contract-Wikipedia). In other terms, man must form a government that they entrust their lives with by giving them support and power, and in return, the government must protect the people from hurting one another by being the objective factor in the justice system. Finally, in the State of Man, Locke claims that “at birth, the mind was a blank slate or “tabula rasa”... born without innate ideas, and that…

    • 1757 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes' Remedy for

    • 680 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes begins Leviathan with Book 1: Of Man, in which he builds, layer by layer, a foundation for his eventual argument that the "natural condition" of man, or one without sovereign control, is one of continuous war, violence, death, and fear.…

    • 680 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    In this paper, I will analyze both Hobbes’ and Rousseau’s view on the Nature of Man. Through my analysis of both, I will show contrast and comparison between both philosophical views. I will identify and explain the central aspect of the Nature of Man as identified by Hobbes and Rousseau and will make connections through a series of explanations and examples that were presented by Hobbes and Rousseau.…

    • 1774 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    In Leviathan, Hobbes attempts to explain how civil government came to be established. He begins his argument at the most logical place; the fundamental basis of mankind, and makes several key steps in the development of human nature to reach the implementation of a sovereign ruler. Hobbes believes the foundation of mankind is motion. Man is in constant motion and the instability that forms from the collisions that ensue from the constant motion form the state of nature. The state of nature is an inherently dangerous lifestyle, where all members live in a state of constant fear. This fear drives man to consent to a social contract, which establishes a peaceful existence. The social contract is ultimately enforced by the sovereign ruler who uses fear of punishment to ensure man follows the laws created. Man essentially gives up one type of fear for another in an attempt to better human life.…

    • 1304 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better 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

    Locke Vs Hobbes

    • 508 Words
    • 3 Pages

    John Locke also believed in the social contract and the state of nature, but he opposed Hobbes’s position on these issues. Locke thought people could live in peace in the state of nature, because everyone was equal and had a conscience to guide them. Locke disagreed with Hobbes’s assumption that the state of war and the state of nature were the same. He felt that people could go without a leader by using reason in its place. The state of war would only occur when they tried to force things on each other. Locke thought that when that happened people had the right to wage war, as an act of…

    • 508 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Hobbes Vs Mill

    • 1168 Words
    • 5 Pages

    Hobbes offers support to his claim that nature makes men apt to fight one another, by showing how people act in their own self-interest. When people act in their own self-interest they look to preserve their own life. Hobbes believes in his definition of nature that man must use their own virtues of protection to ultimately preserve themselves. The way Hobbes describes the motivation is quite simple. For instance, in modern society, one may still lock our homes regardless if it is a perfectly safe area – this is due to Hobbes’ concept of, “self-preservation.” Nevertheless, the root of these actions is actually…

    • 1168 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Powerful 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
  • Good Essays

    Here I think he is reflecting the notion of the individual approaching the idea of making surroundings not violent anymore. However, they want it to be not violent for their own lives. He then says, "And therefore, if a man by words...seem to despoyle himself of the end,...he is not to be understood as if he meant it,...but that he was ignorant of how such words and actions were to be interpreted," (93-94). From this "transferring of right" Hobbes says men call it a contract. I had to look up the word "despoyle" which I found to be spelled "despoil" meaning: to dispossess or be stripped of possessions. Knowing this, I figured he meant that if a man, in a way, fails to reach the main goal of the "contract", and that it is not that they do not want to have an understanding, but that they simply cannot understand the fundamental meaning of making sacrifices and working together under one ruler. He also said it was impossible to have a covenant between you and a "beast," (97). These, I am assuming, are the savage people, or people foreign to the group completing the contract. And this covenant was important, because Hobbes felt not preforming the…

    • 1151 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Powerful Essays

    Hobbes Vs Rousseau

    • 1502 Words
    • 7 Pages

    It is important to remember when relating Hobbes and Rousseau and their ideas of the natural state that they are not speaking of the same thing. Hobbes defines the state of nature as the time when men lived without a common power. Men would constantly be at war with each other, and the elements around them. There would be no laws or authority and without them, men would believe that everything is theirs. It is very similar to the mindset of a child. Children are not born with a natural inclination to share. That is something that parents must teach them as they grow. Greed is naturally instilled in men and because of this men have been fighting and violent even before societies were developed. Men were fighting, stealing, and murdering each other for survival. Rousseau argues with Hobbes. Rousseau describes a hypothetical time when society did not exist and men only acted on their natural instincts which were peaceful and timid. Men would not have any sense of right and wrong because they had not been molded by society’s standards yet.…

    • 1502 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays