Preview

The Motor Of History For Hegel Analysis

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
784 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
The Motor Of History For Hegel Analysis
According to Rousseau, noble savages live in the state of nature, which he believes is the golden stage of humans and exists in the past when humans were first-born. Unlike, Hobbes’ idea, which believes that humans are violence at their purest, have no order since no one can control each other, and are naturally “intrepid and seeks only to attack and to fight” (pg.20), Rousseau stated that in the purest stage, men are innocent, proud, and strong. Moreover, he claimed that “Hobbes says precisely the opposite, because he had wrongly injected into the savage man’s concern for self-preservation the need to satisfy a multitude of passions which are the product of society and which have made laws necessary” (pg. 35). However, the history has been declining and corrupt since the beginning of the birth of humans. The motors of history for Rousseau …show more content…
The motor of history for Hegel is dialects, which is the concept of people holding different viewpoints about a subject or topic and find out the truth through arguments. In his opinion, people will not be able to reach the golden stage, when people are aware of self-conscious and self-comfort since there are always conflicts. Napoleon becomes the spirit of state or reason is an example of the value of present time for Hegel. Napoleon as the founder of the State, which is the divine idea, was carrying out the philosophy of history of Hegel that he presented the spirit is free. Moreover, Hegel believes that German state is what the history is going to take us since he claimed that “it was first the Germanic peoples, through Christianity, who came to the awareness that every human is free by virtue of being human, and that the freedom of spirit comprises our most human nature” (pg. 21). Although Hegel did not promise the golden stage, he did guarantee the stage of freedom when humans are

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • 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

    Unlike Thomas Hobbes, who believed humans were naturally evil, Jean Rousseau believed that humans are born, neither good nor bad, thus corruption or goodness is taught from the society. For example, when children are born, everything they…

    • 514 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rousseau depicts man in his natural state as innocent and good, blaming the invention of property as the root of societal inequalities and lamenting the sacrifice of liberty required of members of a state. Rousseau's early man is deemed non-confrontational, concerned only with 'self-preservation'…

    • 252 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Rousseau concludes that the progression of the sciences and arts are the cause of the corruption of virtue and morality. This discourse won Rousseau fame and recognition, and it laid much of the philosophical groundwork for a second, longer work, The Discourse on the Origin of Inequality. Rousseau’s praise of nature is a theme that continues throughout his writing career.…

    • 192 Words
    • 1 Page
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Rousseau Vs Hobbes

    • 209 Words
    • 1 Page

    In favor of Hobbes, he does make several valid points. His theory in regards to constant competition applies to this day, as people constantly find themselves in situations where they meet others that are of equal physical strengths and could be faced with a conflict as a result. Despite the points that Hobbes makes, his theory is overall negative, as living in a constant state of fear and paranoia is absolutely no way to live one’s life. Rousseau is very pertinent to remind others of how life was before society and technology took over. Life was extremely simple, and everyone was fairly alright with living alone and focusing on themselves and their life. If today’s society was the same as it was over a thousand years ago, almost no one would…

    • 209 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory 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

    Anth 100 Essay 1

    • 2092 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Our society’s progression originates from the ideologies, principles, and dogmas passed down through a succession of different philosophical thinkers. We will focus our attention upon the post-Columbian European and American thinkers who have implemented their beliefs to assess the origins of human nature. This essay will provide a greater understanding between Michel de Montaigne, Rousseau Jean-Jacques and Thomas Hobbes with their descriptions of human nature, society’s origin, and the forces that propelled change in human history.…

    • 2092 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Good Essays

    Nagel believes that we cannot know what it is like to be a bat due to our lack of understanding of consciousness and consequently our inability to understand another being’s subjective character experience. Nagel chooses a bat to articulate his thesis because it is close enough on the tree of genetic evolution that we do not automatically dismiss its similarities but functionally different enough to ensure that his point is clearly displayed.…

    • 572 Words
    • 3 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
  • Powerful Essays

    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.…

    • 1632 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Powerful Essays
  • Better Essays

    The definition of a noble savage is a primitive human representing natural goodness and simplicity when not encumbered by civilization. When born, humans are naturally good. We are naturally benevolent and compassionate creatures and it is only through the corruption from society and others do we become immoral. The Monster consistently displays this trait by doing noble things, but by the influence of society he becomes evil and malicious. Therefore, the idea of the “noble savage,” that all human beings are naturally good and that any evil they develop is a result of the corrupting force of civilization, is portrayed by Victor Frankenstein’s creation in Mary Shelly’s novel Frankenstein.…

    • 1431 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better 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
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hegel's Claim Analysis

    • 77 Words
    • 1 Page

    I feel Hegel's claim regarding the actions of world-historical individuals is crazy. No matter how powerful one is they should not take advantage of the powerless. In the news today there are many instances where rich powerful men have taken advantage of men and women who were trying to build their career. Many people have been subdued to horrible situations in order to feed their families because of powerful humans. Hegel's view do not justify his…

    • 77 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    The Right Thing Theory

    • 1860 Words
    • 8 Pages

    My personal views coincide with those of the author for this week’s essay prompt, who praises the practicality of Locke’s theories while renouncing the overtly idealistic ones of Rousseau. I agree with the author’s analysis that Locke’s theory holds more merit and is more persuasive than Rousseau’s. The author of the excerpt makes a compelling argument that Rousseau’s theory of human nature is naive and not applicable to reality. Rousseau's theories are inapplicable to reality because they are far too idealistic and fail to acknowledge the self-interested aspect of human nature. The argument from the essay prompt is a strong analysis of the philosophers because it effectively uses a personal anecdote to support Locke’s theory that a desire…

    • 1860 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Another doctrine is The Noble Savage, commonly attributed to philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, inspired by the European colonists’ discovery of the indigenous in the New World; it stated the belief that savages were solitary, without ties of love or loyalty and without any industry or art. It also captures the belief that humans in their natural state are selfless, peaceable and untroubled and that negative emotions such as greed and jealousy are products of civilization, a concept which debased Thomas Hobbes’ belief that man is naturally cruel and requires a regular system of police to be resolved. Looking at it from a personal angle, I would say that I quite agree with Hobbes only on one aspect: man is naturally cruel; if he isn’t, then how is it that our history has been tainted with the blood of millions of people who have died because of a single man who could not rein his malice, i.e. Hitler. Even in our everyday life, we manage to…

    • 1154 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays