Hobbes And Morality

1018 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Hobbes views of human nature and the state

Morals are something that everyone has. Hobbes and Korsgaard both have their ideas and theories about morality. Whether those morals are what society says are right or wrong is up to the individual person to decide. Hobbes view is called egoism which says that everyone only acts out of self-interest, and that we cannot have obligations without authority. Korsgaard wants to not just explain those obligations we have to each other, but she also wants to justify them. In this essay I will talk about Hobbes and Korsgaard, and their differing positions on morality.
Thomas Hobbes main theory about morality is known as the State of Nature. Hobbes says that right and wrong are based on contracts that we make with each other within in a government. The State of Nature says that all people are born equal, but we do everything in our power to overpower one another. We are less likely to fight each other if we know who is in charge, however, Hobbes says don’t know who is in charge and that is why we fight each other more. Hobbes also talks about the “right of nature”. This basically states that if we as humans, need to hurt someone else in order to better ourselves, then it is okay, not wrong. Anything we need to do to better ourselves, even hurt others is acceptable.
Hobbes also talks about reason and because of reason, there are laws that we can all agree on, these are called natural laws. Hobbes’s natural laws say that 1. Man ought to seek peace, if not he may use advantages of war and 2. Men should be willing to lay down their arms when others do. The first point states that since peace is easier to live with, people should try harder to achieve peace on their own without any kind of fighting or war. An example of the second point is...

... middle of paper ...

...ty. Practical identity is the way a person chooses to identify themselves with. For example, I identify myself as a good person. Someone else may identify themselves as a bad person, but it is only that individual that can decide what they are identified as.
All in all, I feel that Hobbes and Korsgaard both have their own ideas about what morality is and what it entails. I am going to have to agree with Hobbes on this topic. I agree when he says that everyone acts out of self-interest because it is true. If people knew that they could go to a clothing store or an electronic store and take anything they wanted without any chance of getting caught and no consequences, I think more people than not would jump at the chance. I also agree what he says about the natural laws, rights, etc.. These are all things we see today, so it is very relevant in our culture today.

Show More
Related

  • Comparing John Locke and Thomas Hobbes

    1242 Words  | 3 Pages

    Hobbes and Locke both picture a different scene when they express human nature. Even though they both believed that men naturally have to some extent equality and freedom, what makes their concepts different is the presence or absence of the natural law. In Hobbes' theory, men in their natural state are at constant war, the war of all against all. Another Hobbes belief is that most people are selfish and tend to do everything for their own reason. To Hobbes humans are driven to maximize personal gains so in a world where there are no rules humans are in constant fear of each other as they each try to get as much as they can, enough is never enough.

    Read More

  • Hobbes and Locke: The Power Debate

    1209 Words  | 3 Pages

    Although Hobbes and Locke agree that all people are equal, they perceive natural rights and human nature in very different ways. Hobbes believed that people innately love liberty and dominion over others and that men fight due to three “principal causes”: “competition,” which results in men invading for “gain;” “insecurity,” which makes men invade for “safety;” and “glory,” which makes men invade for “reputation.” He states that men are natural...

    Read More

  • Civil War In Thomas Hobbes Leviathan

    1805 Words  | 4 Pages

    His first assumption is that people are physically and mentally similar to one another, and this similarity means that “no individual has the capacity to overpower or influence another” (Hobbes). A flaw, however, that I realize in this assertion is that there do exist in society persons of deficient physical and mental ability. For example, people with severe physical or mental handicaps would not fare well in Hobbes’ state of nature because they would be easily dominated. Hobbes’ second assumption is that people generally want to protect their own lives, “shun[ning] death” (Hobbes). This proclivity for self-preservation does not translate to an innate malevolent nature of humans; however, it does imply that humans tend to be more indifferent towards each other than benevolent. I tend to agree with this second assumption because in my experience, individuals think of themselves in an elevated manner, and if someone does not agree with this view, the individual becomes offended. Individuals tend to judge others based on swift observations, dismissing others if they do not align with one’s personal preferences. The final assumption Hobbes asserts is that individuals have a penchant for religion. This penchant stems from the curious and anxious nature of individuals. Hobbes thinks that these aspects of human nature cause individuals to “seek out religious beliefs” (Hobbes) in order to quell the curiosity and anxiety that dominates their lives. In addition to these various normative assumptions regarding the state of nature, Hobbes outlines the right of nature, which is “a liberty right to preserve the individual in the state of nature” (Hobbes). In essence, this

    Read More

  • Human Nature as Viewed by Thomas Hobbes and David Hume

    1952 Words  | 4 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • Equality: Comparing Hobbes and Locke

    2000 Words  | 4 Pages

    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...

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes Research Paper

    782 Words  | 2 Pages

    Self-preservation is the most fundamental desire in humans. Without laws or governance no one would be able to tell how or how not to try to stay alive. Hobbes argues that all humans are by nature equal in body and mind; therefore, everyone is naturally willing to fight each other if needed to. Every person has a natural right to do anything that they think is necessary for preserving their own life. For example: If in order for you to stay alive means you must shoot your friends who have become sick by a contagious plague, then that is the means necessary for your own self-preservation. Shooting your friends to protect your own life is not seen an unjust act. According to Hobbes, there is no room for morality because in a state of nature there is no space for the unjust. Everything is somehow justifiable. Hobbes calls this the Natural Right of Liberty. Furthermore, anything can be seen as a necessity in order to preserve one’s life. For example: If one doesn’t eat, then they won’t have enough sustenance which could then lead to death due to starvation. Eating is seen as a necessity needed to take in order to preserve ...

    Read More

  • Universal Rights: A Study on Frederick Douglass' Speech

    1119 Words  | 3 Pages

    According to Hobbes, every human being has the right to put into practice his talents for the sake of self-preservation and growth. There is a constant struggle between man and in humanity. He states, “ For such is that nature of men, that howsoever they may acknowledge many others to be more witty, or more eloquent, or more learned; yet they will hardly believe there be many so wise as themselves, for they see their own wit at hand and other men’s at a distance” (Hobbes 68). This eternal state conflict leaves Hobbes to believe it is better to accept the established laws and customs of their nation. Regardless if unjustly inflicting hardship is shown in a minority or in subordinate group. For the sake of obtaining civil peace and security, we must turn away from natural and divine laws. Hobbes then states: “As if it were Injustice to sell dearer than we buy; or to give more to a man than he merits. The value of all things contracted for, is measured by the Appetite of the Contractors: and therefore the just value, is that which they be contented to give” (Hobbes 69). Here is another example in which Hobbes believes that man should stick to man-made laws and break from basically the notion of “ universal rights”. He expresses how human beings are selfish, anti-social, and competitive. The conclusion in Hobbes “ state of nature” teaching is the

    Read More

  • Justice in Plato's Republic and Hobbes' Leviathan

    2781 Words  | 6 Pages

    Hobbes explains justice in relation to obligations and self-preservation. This essay will analyze justice specifically in relation to the statement? The fool hath said in his heart, There is no such thing as justice. Looking for Hobbes & Hobbies? reply to the fool will demonstrate that his main goal was to declare what people ought to do when interacting with others and what can be expected in return for that behaviour.

    Read More

  • good or evil

    1895 Words  | 4 Pages

    The argument as to whether humans are born good or evil is one that been philosophized for hundreds of years by many of the world’s greatest minds. Are humans born with a particular set of qualities that define their character and how they are perceived in society? Are they born with the power to choose between good and evil? The idea of human nature relies on the theory that there is an engrained set of features which are shared by all humans—components that determine the way people reason and behave. John Locke and Thomas Hobbes are two opposing philosophers who have devoted many years to studying this subject. For Locke, the state of nature— the original condition of all humanity before civilization and order were established —is one where man is born free, equal and have rights that others should respect, such as the right to live and the right to liberty. These rights were essentially derived from natural law— an unwritten law in which every man must judge his/her own actions against. For Hobbes, however, the state of nature is one of constant war; solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short ; it is, in Hobbes’ mind, civilization that separates humans from their primitive state. Hobbes believed that an individual’s only drive in life is to serve themselves above all else. In order to obtain this goal, humans must use conflict as a means of self-gain to take what they desire for their self-serving nature. Although Hobbes’ theory on human nature is…..…John Locke provides one of the best in depth accounts of true human nature, as he suggests that man is not born with any pre-conceived ideals, apart from being born free. Locke theorised that man was born with a clean slate, thus, they have the ability to make decisions that are e...

    Read More

  • Critical Analysis Of Korsgaard's The Authority Of Reflection

    1087 Words  | 3 Pages

    Korsgaard defines practical identity as “a description under which you find your life to be worth living and your actions worth

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes and Modern Liberalism

    1498 Words  | 3 Pages

    Lloyd, S. A. (2014). Hobbes's Moral and Political Philosophy. In S. University, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Stanford: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2014/entries/hobbes-moral/.

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan

    1044 Words  | 3 Pages

    He claims that acts of kindness, charity and benevolence are always actions that the performer believes will result in a beneficial consequence for himself. Hobbes’ basis for this argument lies in the concept of reason. He writes that human beings are logical creatures and unlike other animals, use reason to make all of their decisions (Leviathan 2, 17). A law dictated by reason that will benefit a man is called a law of nature. Hobbes lists three fundamental laws of nature that promote the primary motivation of men, which is self-preservation.

    Read More

  • Thrasymachus Vs Hobbes

    678 Words  | 2 Pages

    Hobbes, on the other hand argues that justice is needed for people to live together in civil society. He outlines this idea down to human beings in the

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes and the Realist School

    732 Words  | 2 Pages

    Hobbes was a strong believer in the thought that human nature was evil. He believed that “only the unlimited power of a sovereign could contain human passions that disrupt the social order and threatened civilized life.” Hobbes believed that human nature was a force that would lead to a constant state of war if it was not controlled. In his work the Leviathan, he laid out a secular political statement in which he stated the significance of absolutism.

    Read More

  • Hobbes' View of Human Nature and his Vision of Government

    446 Words  | 1 Pages

    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.

    Read More

More about Hobbes And Morality

Open Document