Comparing Lord Of The Flies And The Leviathan

677 Words2 Pages

Thomas Hobbes was a 17th century British philosopher who wrote about human nature and how people act without rules in society. One of Hobbes’ beliefs was humanity in the state of nature, a society without civilization or rules. Both Lord of the Flies by William Golding and the Leviathan by Hobbes show when in the state of nature, a person can obtain limited altruism, the idea that when sources aren’t available and people lose their goodness and become immoral. Lord of The Flies exemplifies limited altruism, for example, Jack stole Piggy’s glasses, and “Samneric” gave Jack Ralph's hiding spot for their own safety. Both authors felt that even if one puts themselves in front of others for their safety, they are not “wholly” selfish. Thomas Hobbes …show more content…

Throughout Golding’s book limited altruism was shown through Jack’s actions. Merridew stole Piggy’s glasses while he and others in his group were sleeping. This shows that Jack was doing everything he can to keep himself and his group supplied. While Ralph, Piggy, and Samneric were sleeping, Jack's tribe invaded their hut and stole Piggy’s glasses. Piggy then realized that “They stole it!” “Thats them,” said Piggy. “They blinded me. See?” (Golding 169) Since Piggy’s glasses set a focal point to making fire, Jack feels that it is necessary to steal the glasses, not only for rescuing the group, but so Jack can keep himself in power and keep his group safe. On the other hand, these glasses are used to prevent Piggy from being basically blind. Since, Piggy is the symbol of the intellectual aspect of civilization, state of nature from this point on is not only unbearable for Piggy, but everyone. This tactic illuminates the beliefs of both Hobbes and Golding, because they both felt that when sources are limited, people lose benevolence by putting themselves in a beneficial state rather than those around them. As civilization begins to fade Jack’s hunger becomes visible as well as his strive for his and his groups …show more content…

“Samneric” are forced, by Jack, to give up Ralph's hiding spot in the forest so they could protect their lives first. As Jack and his tribe were on the lookout for Ralph, “Samneric” tell Jack that, “He meant he’d hide in there.” (Golding 192) .This evidence upheld Hobbes’s and Golding’s belief that in the state of nature, even close friends can't rely on each other. In the novel, Ralph is able to establish a close relationship with “Samneric”. When Ralph over hears Sam and Eric telling Jack their hiding spot, he realizes that his safety was given up for Sam and Eric’s. Although Ralph may think that this is selfish, according to the Leviathan, Hobbes says that you cannot assume that whenever a person feels that they should risk their own life for another person life, they will sacrifice for them. Also, Hobbes believed people don’t need to be completely selfish in order to put their safety first. This evidence shows that Jack’s forcing of Sam and Eric to give up Ralph’s spot in the forest once again brings out greed in Jack, but also proves Hobbes belief that “Samneric” shouldn’t be considered “wholly selfish” because safety of themselves is more important than safety of

Open Document