Humans are born striving to catch a breath, eat some food, quench their thirst, feel affection, be able to fend for their mind and body; take care of one’s self. There is a term often referred to by Hobbes as survival machines (Pinker 2011). We are each a survival machine, created with the instinct to supply ourselves with our needs in the most efficient and safest way possible for us individually, and only to put one’s self at risk when the benefits outweigh the gains. Humans are born with the capacity for violence; it is not invented but rather, instigated. Violence does not always lead to warfare but is a form of conflict that given certain influences can manifest into warfare. I strongly agree with the argument that warfare has played a key role in human evolution, leading to part of our nature as a species. Secure satisfaction is the key to a society free of warfare. Due to various factors in life, this satisfaction is unattainable, thus leading to frustration, aggression, violence, and in time, warfare. Given a desperate context, a conflict for the attainment of needs, or a survival instinct involving violence; warfare is present in any society around the globe. Regardless of culture, context, or level of development. I am going to discuss Hobbes’s three reasons for quarrel that justify how all human beings strive for the same ideals. Furthermore, I will discuss the more clearly observed examples of warfare when there are situations of desperation and what variables forage conflict. Lastly, I will bring to light the other side of this argument, explaining how due to change of perspective, a different conclusion is made but all humans are born with the same yearns for satisfaction. This is an undeniable point that cannot be m...
... middle of paper ...
... being learned. Humans are animals with hormones and survival instincts that are not created by situations but rather instigated by situations.
Humans do not necessarily have intent to hurt, but given no choice, will do what it takes to survive, just as one has since the moment they struggled to catch their first breath.
References Cited
Chagnon, Napoleon. A.
1988 Life histories, blood revenge, and warfare in a tribal population. Science 239(4843): 985-992.
Davies, James C.
1970 Violence and Aggression: Innate or Not? The Western Political Quarterly 23 (3): 611-623. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/446577
Dollard, John.
1939 Frustration and Aggression, United States, New Haven.
Mead, Margaret.
1940 Warfare is only an invention—not a biological necessity. Asia 40(8): 402-405.
Pinker, Stephan.
2011 The Better Angels of Our Nature, United States, Viking Books.
In the state of nature, equality creates a state of war amongst men. Hobbes’ believes that the cause of the state of war is the nature of man, perfect equality and self-preservation. The idea self-preservation in Hobbes’ state of nature consents to man to harming one another in the name of survival, because it is also in man’s nature. The definition of self-preservation and survival is different for each individual. No man in the state of nature has the authority to judge or question any individual’s acti...
At no time, in this natural state, is injustice even possible. As Hobbes so concisely states, "Where there is no common Power, there is no Law: where no Law, no Injustice." (Hobbes 188) Essentially, since every man is entitled to everything, he is also at liberty to exert any means possible -- including violence -- in order to satisfy all of his wants and needs. In this State of War, each individu...
Conflict is constant. It is everywhere. It exists within one’s own mind, different desires fighting for dominance. It exists outside in nature, different animals fighting for the limited resources available, and it exists in human society, in the courts. It can occur subtly, making small changes that do not register consciously, and it can occur directly and violently, the use of pure strength, whether physical, social, economic, or academic, to assert dominance and achieve one’s goals; this is the use of force. Yet, with the use of force, the user of force is destined to be one day felled by it. “He who lives by the sword will die by the sword.”
To understand Hobbes’s argument for why the State of Nature is a State of War it is important to understand Hobbes’s meanings of the terms State of Nature and State of War. The State of Nature is the condition where mankind is forced in contact with one another in a society where there is no authority to enforce power or laws. In this state, the lack of authority encompasses the lack of political institutions and the connotations associated with them: no national allegiances and no punishment. All men in this state have the right to any actions, even to harm one another and none of these actions are unjust. The resulting atmosphere created by this Sate of Nature is the State of War where all rational people live in constant fear of violent and brutish attacks. The State of War is a state of uncertainty and insecurity. It does not always necessarily consist of actual fighting but instead consists of the constant awareness that everyone is ready to fight everyone else. To substantiate his argument that the State of Nature is a Sate of War he relies on three assumptions.
Hobbes views human nature as the war of each man against each man. For Hobbes, the essence of human nature can be found when we consider how man acts apart from any government or order. Hobbes describes the world as “a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man.” (Hobbes mp. 186) In such a world, there are “no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” (Hobbes mp. 186) Hobbes believes that laws are what regulate us from acting in the same way now. He evidences that our nature is this way by citing that we continue to lock our doors for fear of theft or harm. Hobbes gives a good argument which is in line with what we know of survivalism, and evidences his claim well. Hobbes claims that man is never happy in having company, unless that company is utterly dominated. He says, “men have no pleasure, (but on the contrary a great dea...
What is the natural condition of human beings? How does the natural condition of human beings lead to war? What is the remedy of the natural condition of human beings? In his book, Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes states that human beings are equal and thus there is no greater good in life. Hobbes analyzes the natural condition of human beings by examining their desires and behavior. He further examines how the natural condition of human beings, if left to rule itself without the existence of the law, leads to conflict and war. Because the natural condition of human beings leads to war, he provides a suggestion that will enable them to live peacefully and co-exist. Hobbes explains that by nature, human beings are equal and they have an equal hope to
Self-preservation is an important factor in shaping the ideologies of Hobbes and Locke as it ties in to scarcity of resources and how each of them view man’s sate of nature. Hobbes and Locke both believe in self-preservation but how each of them get there is very different. Hobbes believes that man’s state of nature is a constant state of war because of his need to self-preserve. He believes that because of scarcity of goods, man will be forced into competition, and eventually will take what is others because of competition, greed, and his belief of scarce goods. Hobbes also states that glory attributes to man’s state of nature being a constant state of war because that drives man to go after another human or his property, on the one reason of obtaining glory even if they have enough to self preserve. Equality ties in with Hobbes view of man being driven by competition and glory because he believes that because man is equal in terms of physical and mental strength, this give them an equal cha...
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,
Violence causes a great deal of suffering and harm in the world today and yesterday (Cross 2013). Peace and conflict researchers are undeniably justified in their selection of inter and intra-state violence as objects of study because the social context for both the performance and understanding of violence is of central importance (Cross 2013). However it is surprisingly rare to find a definition of violence (Moore 2003). Thus uncertainty prevails as to whether violence is limited to physical abuse or includes verbal and psychological abuse (Moore 2003). Agreeing with Moore (2003), Galtung (1969) said it is not important to arrive at a definition of violence because there are obliviously many types of violence. Violence is not
The constant state of war is what Hobbes believes to be man’s original state of nature. According to Hobbes, man cannot be trusted in the state of nature. War among men is consequent and nothing can be unjust. Notions of justice and injustice or right and wrong will not hav...
Hobbes believes that all men are equal insofar as that the weakest man has the power to kill the strongest man. Thus given that every man is vulnerable to any other man, all men have a very strong desire to escape the state where killing each other is acceptable, escape the state of nature. This can be done, simply put by endeavoring peace which coupled with not making war except to defend oneself, is the first law of nature (Leviathan 1, 14).
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.
In Leviathan, Hobbes seems to underestimate the motives of mankind. His pessimistic view of human nature sheds no light on the goods that men do. While human nature may create a sense of personal survival, it does not imply that human nature will lead towards violent behavior. When left to provide for themselves, mankind will work toward a peace that benefits them all. There will always be evil in the world which will disrupt the peace, but in the end the strength of men should triumph.
Many social psychologists agree that aggression can be defined as behaviour which intends to harm another person who does not want harm inflicted on them (Baron & Richardson, 1994; Bushman & Huesmann, 2010). This definition is all encompassing capturing the possible range of aggressive behaviours whilst excluding activities that can ‘hurt’ but to which the target of the hurt willingly consents and are therefore not considered aggressive due to this circumstance, for example, surgery. As aggression can be presented at differing levels and as result of this can range from the act of pushing someone over to domestic violence or even the extremities of terrorism. Therefore, as aggressive behaviour encompasses such a wide range of actions ranging
Daniel, Caroline. “Killing with kindness.” New Statesman. 126 (1997): 16(3). Infotrac. Online. 19 Nov. 1999