Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The origin of government by the view thomas hobbes
Hobbes and sovereignty essays
Hobbes’ case for the government
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The origin of government by the view thomas hobbes
Thomas Hobbes is the English philosopher, which is improved Western political philosophy and its terms like civil society, absolutism for the sovereign, right of the individual, legitimate power’s representativeness etc. In his famous book of Leviathan, he showed sovereign’s political order’s artificial character and what life would be without government which named as state of nature by the Hobbes. In this state like all people in the world also they will try to survive for their life and avoid their acts which can cause their death. According to Hobbes, the best possibilty for diminishing the possibilty of danger coming from another people is having social contract for establish civil society. According to Hobbes, the causes of conflicts are human’s innate behaivour like competitors for materials, feeling insecurity etc. In addition, thir fear of death can be advantage on the obeying their social contract for the peace. Law of nature’s rules are fundemental contract between people to avoid war which is the worst situation in the state. So to understand reasons of conflict and the solutions for long term peace firstly person should understand the law of nature’s requirements and Hobbes’ ideas reason for permanent peace monarchy is the best form of government mechanism. Law of nature is a general rule that is discovered through reason. According to Hobbes, humans’ basic instict is survive and protect his life so they should seek peace. Due to that, first law of nature is the most important one is, to seek peace and follow it. The second, giving up some rights, reciprocity to defend. By all means we can defend ourselves. This mutual transferring of rights is called social contract and its basis of the notion of moral obligation. F... ... middle of paper ... ... is the only right form of government. Hobbes believes that any such conflict in system such as seperation of powers can leads to civil war. He holds that any form of ordered government is preferable to civil war. Thus he advocates that all members of society submit to one absolute, central authority for the sake of maintaining the common peace. For Hobbes, this is the only sure means of maintaining a civil, peaceful polity and preventing the dissolution of society into civil war. In conclusion, conflicts reason is people’s instincts about competiton on material sources to be more powerful than others to avoid anticipation with obeying the law of nature to avoid fear of death and war is the best option for Hobbes. Moreover, monarchycial government which control the law of nature’s compliance with controling everything can prevent war and any conflict in the society.
In The Leviathan Thomas Hobbes argues for the establishment of a society that does not contain the elements of its own demise. Hobbes views civil war as a society’s ultimate demise, and the only way to avoid it is for the citizens initially to submit to an absolute political authority. For Hobbes, civil war is inevitable in every type of government except an absolute government. In order to sustain this absolute government, the citizens not only must submit to the absolute political authority, but they must also not partake in activities that actively undermine the absolute political authority’s power. For these reasons, it is clear that Hobbes believes in political obedience and its ability to influence the peace of a society. Furthermore,
Hobbes, as one of the early political philosophers, believes human has the nature to acquire “power after power” and has three fundamental interests which are safety, “conjugal affections”, and riches for commodious lives. (Hobbes, p108, p191) From this basis, Hobbes deducts that in a state of nature, human tends to fight against each other (state of war) to secure more resources (Hobbes,
In conclusion, Hobbes argues in the Leviathan that people are equal mentally and physically. Therefore, people naturally will fight for what they want and to protect what is theirs. Hobbes argues that morality doesn’t apply in a society where there are no laws or governance. People do whatever is needed to do for self-preservation and whatever must be done is not seen as unjust. Additionally, everyone wants a greater power and this is to have control and so that they will be seen as less of a weak opponent to attack or invade their lands. I agree with Thomas Hobbes who argued that if people were not subject to laws or governance; everyone would result to fighting each other.
Thomas Hobbes derived his theories by concluding that man in and of itself was evil. In addition, he felt that if left without a government authority, life would be "nasty, brutish, and short". In a direct result of the evilness of man comes the theory that self-preservation is the most imperative component of life. At all costs, one must uphold this right and do whatever is necessary to preserve it. Because every man in a state of nature can be based on one theory, it creates a state of equal mentality. If one man basis life around self-preservation, so will the next. With a society being in this perpetual condition, it creates a state of war. One man against all others—all equal in ability regardless of size or intelligence due to circumstances and willpower that can always level the playing field.
Thomas Hobbes is known best for his political thought and the English philosopher. The vision of Hobbes for the world is still relevant to modern politics. He always focus the problems of social and political order: that how human beings can keep away the terror of civil and difference to live together in peace and got authorize to decide every social and political matter. Otherwise state of nature anticipate us and closely remind us of civil war where there everyone have insecurity and fear violent death and human cooperation. Hobbes himself had complex view of human motivation that most researcher accept. He see that human beings are much more self-interested. (Hobbes)
The state of war would likely occur if a civil government did not properly care for its citizens because it exists when there is conflict between citizens and “no common superior on earth to appeal to for relief. ”5 It is very likely that this could arise if a government did nothing to prevent conflict and was not invested in its citizens’ rights. Locke also has a stronger argument than Hobbes because Hobbes’ belief that it is necessary to have a supreme ruler in order to prevent the state of war in society is inherently flawed. Locke’s proposal for the proper behavior of a civil government distinguishes between the law and the lawmaker, and when a legislative body creates a law, the rules of the law itself are above it. Hobbes’ proposal does not differentiate between the lawmaker and the lawmaker because the lawmaker under his system of government would have complete control of the law.
Hobbes argues for this form of government as a solution to the crises of all men being equal and them having the right to get justice when laws or rules are broken. He says that there should be a social contract putting trust into one person to take care of all the good and bad that people do. It is not a right that puts someone into power, but a contract with the people so that they can change who is in charge if they feel that, that person is not getting the justice that is needed and allowing bad stuff to continue to happen. Hobbes also argues that this form of government was needed to overcome the defects of human nature, his case was made by referring to science rather than religion to support this form of
tradition. Characteristic of his approach is an attempt to justify absolute political authority by an appeal to our rational nature, i.e., in order to avoid a state of war, the appointment of such an authority is considered to be in our best rational interest. By this is implied that we are to collectively give up our naturally endowed freedom in order to ascertain a prolonged existence. This allows for Hobbes to grant such an authority unbounded and absolute power: as long as this authority ensures our continued existence—which reflects our most fundamental drive—rebellion is strictly forbidden. Since the guarantee of our continued existence seems to function as the only criterion for a legitimate authority, one can question some of its implications.
The desire for self-preservation creates an inherent competitiveness throughout the state of nature, one that drives the feelings of distrust and fear, and perpetuates the glory-seeking nature of all men. Even if a person seems like he or she is performing a good deed for someone else, their purpose is not to aid another, it is self-serving in the sense that it will make him or her feel and look good. Like Locke, Hobbes also believes that all men are equal, not because they were born equal, but because they can kill each other, which makes no one life worth more than another. These drastically different idea’s of human nature result in two distinct theories of the state of nature.
He made a statement on democracy that, “All mankind is in a perpetual and restless desire for power which can only stopped in death,” which would give power to the individual would be creating a dangerous situation which would start a “war of every man against every man, “and life will be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” Despite all this, Thomas Hobbes still believed a separate group of representatives can present the problems of the common person to the king, but the absolute monarch has the final say
For Thomas Hobbes, the state of nature is a theoretical model of life prior to the formation of the state, it’s institutions and the government. Individuals make their own decisions, and there are no recognized authoritative figures. There is also no morality. Hobbes believes that by nature, all humans are equal in faculties of body and mind, with no claims to exclusive benefits. Conflicts will arise due to this equality. When a particular object is desired by both parties, their competitive nature will suppress their natural desire for peace. Due to this, a state of war arises in which individuals ...
Locke’s belief in “consent” by the people creates a democratic structure of community. In this way, the community is merely created to protect the rights and the property of the people. His idealistic government would have the power controlled by those who are being ruled, the people. Locke explains that we must “make one body politic, wherein the majority have a right to act and conclude the rest” (Locke 101).The government is a reflection of the “majority” of the community, and will represent the wishes of the people. The power is held by those who are being ruled, and they have equal rights in deciding their political outcomes. Locke explains that “wherever law ends, tyranny begins”, so once the rights of the people are suppressed this injustice begins (Locke 102). Locke also explains that if a government was to act unjust, not with the best interest of the majority, then it is the right and the responsibility of the people to overthrow “tyranny” (Locke 102). The people, who have the power, should always defend their human rights, especially from unlawful rulers. This view of government shifts with Hobbes’ perspective. Hobbes believes that one man should rule the community, and therefore the government should have power in the ruler rather than the people being ruled. This single ruler will be educated about the corrupt nature of mankind and the bad nature of
“The condition of man.. is a condition of war of everyone against everyone”. This is a famous quote from the English Philosopher, Thomas Hobbes. He is stating that if everyone has the same power, there will be a war against everyone. Instead of having the people rule, Hobbes wanted the government to have the full control over the people so that there wouldn’t be wars about the amount of power that one person has. In this essay, there will be many facts about how/why Hobbes’ view on government and human nature is the best for the people.
Hobbes wrote the Leviathan during the civil war where he had experienced horrendous visions of violence. “Thomas Hobbes lived during some of the most tumultuous times in European history -- consequently, it should be no surprise that his theories were thoroughly pessimistic regarding human nature.” This may support his view that he would rather have any higher authority rather than none no matter how corrupted the government actually is. He wrote that the people “should respect and obey their government because without it society would descend into a civil war ‘of every man against every man’.” However, this may have been the cause for a bias view. To elaborate, a war is an extreme depiction of the potential volatility in human nature. Therefore making one aspect of humanity seems pre-dominant.
Hobbes believed that human beings naturally desire the power to live well and that they will never be satisfied with the power they have without acquiring more power. After this, he believes, there usually succeeds a new desire such as fame and glory, ease and sensual pleasure or admiration from others. He also believed that all people are created equally. That everyone is equally capable of killing each other because although one man may be stronger than another, the weaker may be compensated for by his intellect or some other individual aspect. Hobbes believed that the nature of humanity leads people to seek power. He said that when two or more people want the same thing, they become enemies and attempt to destroy each other. He called this time when men oppose each other war. He said that there were three basic causes for war, competition, distrust and glory. In each of these cases, men use violence to invade their enemies territory either for their personal gain, their safety or for glory. He said that without a common power to unite the people, they would be in a war of every man against every man as long as the will to fight is known. He believed that this state of war was the natural state of human beings and that harmony among human beings is artificial because it is based on an agreement. If a group of people had something in common such as a common interest or a common goal, they would not be at war and united they would be more powerful against those who would seek to destroy them. One thing he noted that was consistent in all men was their interest in self-preservation.