Preview

Rules: State of Nature and Thomas Hobbes

Good Essays
Open Document
Open Document
465 Words
Grammar
Grammar
Plagiarism
Plagiarism
Writing
Writing
Score
Score
Rules: State of Nature and Thomas Hobbes
Rules are intended to promote and maintain civilized society. Many people at times unaware of the intention, think rules restrict them to do whatever they please. Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean Rousseau are all great examples who exemplify the importance of using rules. All of three of them use the State of Nature to show the true state of humankind. Almost every action that people make would lead to utter chaos, misleading people to the wrong definition to happiness. According to Thomas Hobbes, the natural state of mankind is utterly brutal. Hobbes indicates that the natural state of man can lead to an outbreak of war. In order to refrain from war, Hobbes suggests creating a civil society. Hobbes hypothetically thinks that men are naturally selfish. Earth has limited resources that people want to get their hands on. Without any laws, there will be no power or authority that will be able to have men cooperate. Men have distrust and fear dissatisfactions. Hobbes strongly interprets that the State of Nature will eventually lead to an inescapable war. In the book Lord of the Flies, Golding’s work precisely displays the reason why a civil society is needed. When the young boys were left on the island without any rules or limitations, they were uncontrollable and acted like savages. Throwing boulders to kill each other, brutally killing other animals, and torturing the other boys. Because of their behavior, the boys started to kill each other. Only after seeing a civilized rescuer did they realize their barbaric behavior. Golding also shows that there has always been evil among us, but have never opened. Therefore, with people positioned to enforce rules and laws, this savagery can be avoided. Under my parents’ roof, I must abide by their rules. When I was in elementary school, I often questioned my parents’ authority over me. I broke many rules at school and at home. I used to lie about every situation that my parents’ would ask me about. One day, my

You May Also Find These Documents Helpful

  • Good Essays

    Pros And Cons Of Hobbes

    • 755 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Hobbes reasoned that war is natural because when we are not adhering to a common power, our instinct is to quarrel with one another (pg. 208). This goes back to our three sources of conflict being competition, diffidence, and glory; without governance, we are susceptible to our innate desires because we have no confirmation that there will be time of peace. He also illustrates that war is natural through his example of the man who always locks his doors and belongings, arguing that it is our natural state to suppose there is war (pg. 209). Hobbes believes war is natural because we are always acting in our own self-interest, unconcerned and independent of everyone…

    • 755 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes vs Locke

    • 551 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were known as Social Contract Theorists, and Natural Law Theorists. The two men both had very strong views on freedom and how a country should be governed. Thomas Hobbes had more of a Pessimistic view while John locke had more of an Optimistic view. Hobbes and Locke believed in a type of Social Contract between the Government and being governed. Hobbes believed in Absolute Monarchs and Locke believed in the will of people being governed. Hobbes opposed constitutionalism because of his pessimistic appraisal of human nature. They both had extremely different views on government, but the bases of their arguments were similar. They both used reason to justify their ideas, rather than divine right. Although both men acknowledged that there was a God, He played a very small role in their ideologies. I believe that both Hobbes and Locke are genuinely correct.…

    • 551 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good 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
  • Better Essays

    It is a brutish and violent nature. In the absence of culture, arts, science, reading or writing, humans, possibly, are more related to animals, since animals also live in the state of nature, and who always fight for domination. This rather negative view is Hobbe’s main reason why there should be a government. There should be an authority to establish peace. In peace, numerous achievements can be obtained. In peace does humanity progress. It might be argued that Hobbes demands a despot, an autocracy. Still, is not that better than the state of nature? There might be many opposing arguments especially that of the anarchists, yet Hobbe’s examples might not be conquered because they are succinct and feasible. They are plausibly impregnable because they are factual, not idealist. Leviathan does convincingly argue, and this monster in the state of nature does devour…

    • 1395 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Better Essays
  • Good Essays

    According to Hobbes, the natural condition of humanity results in war for one main reason - desire. The first of these reasons is when multiple men desire the same thing, the natural result is war – “… Competition of riches, honour, command, or other power, inclineth to contention, enmity, and war; because the way of one competitor to the attaining of his desire is to kill, subdue, supplant, or repel the other” (Hobbes 58). This essentially means that men will fight to the death to get whatever it is that they want. Hobbes also points out that all men are equal because even the weaker can…

    • 690 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Thomas Hobbes was an English philosopher of the 1600’s that tried to create a basis for politics. Having experienced the English civil war, Hobbes realized that the conflict was the result of human nature. Hobbes exclaimed that the world was full of greedy people and those who are selfless and care only for themselves. Without the government to maintain order, Hobbes said that there would be “a condition of war of everyone against everyone”. Hobbes noted that in order to stop this, the people would have to sacrifice their freedom for the government. In exchange, they gained law and order. He also notes that this sacrifice would allow the government to suppress any form of rebellion. Hobbes called this agreement the social contract.…

    • 123 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes was a philosopher who saw humans as a purely physical being. He believed that all human actions can be explained through the motions in our bodies. According to Hobbes all feelings and emotions are a result of phantasms, our perception of the objects around us. This perception is a motion within our bodies and each person perceives these phantasms differently causing love, hate, desires, and what we think is good and bad. Every feeling that comes from ones perspective has a physical feeling, such as desires can cause certain pains and it is only human nature that one does whatever is needed in order to relieve those pains. Hobbes therefore sees humans as being able, by their state of nature, to take or do whatever necessary for themselves even if it shows no regard for the other people their actions may harm. This inevitably would end up in a fight for survival or “the war of all against all”. In order to prevent such a war from happening Hobbes thought it necessary that the individuals must promise each other to give up their right to govern themselves to the sovereign for the mutual benefit of the people. This sovereign then has absolute power to rule with no questions asked and not to only act on behalf of the citizens but to completely embody their will. In summation, Hobbes believed that society could only exist under power of the sovereign and that life in the state of nature is violent, short and brutish, as all men act on self-interest.…

    • 1014 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Satisfactory Essays

    Hobbes credits to each person in the state of nature a liberty right to preserve herself, which he terms “the right of nature”. This is the right to do whatsoever one sincerely judges requiring for one's protection; yet because it is at least possible that virtually anything might be judged necessary for one's protection, this hypothetically limited right of nature becomes in practice an unlimited right to potentially anything, or, as Hobbes puts it, a right “to all things”. Hobbes further assumes that people should accept what they see to be the necessary means to their most important ends.…

    • 214 Words
    • 1 Page
    Satisfactory Essays
  • Good Essays

    Enlightenment Thinkers

    • 503 Words
    • 3 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes, an English philosopher of the 1600's, tried to create a science of politics. After witnessing the horrors of the English Civil War, Hobbes decided that conflict was part of human nature. Without governments to keep order, Hobbes said, there would be "war of everyone against everyone". In this state of nature life would be "nasty, brutish, and short." In his book Leviathan, Hobbes argued that to escape such a bleak life, people gave up their rights to a strong ruler. In exchange, they gained law and order. Hobbes called this agreement, by which people created a government, the social contract. Hobbes basically saw people as naturally selfish and violent.…

    • 503 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    hobbes and kant

    • 1500 Words
    • 6 Pages

    Hobbes was a different kind of philosopher that had a very pessimistic view on humanity. In Hobbes’ book the Leviathan, he believed that humans were naturally nasty creatures and needed to be regulated in a society. For Hobbes one thing he also believed in was Utilitarianism, which is the desire for pleasure that drives our actions, basically, the most useful choice for your benefit. Hobbes had a theory that was called “the state of nature”, which in the eyes of Hobbes was life for humans before any kind of laws or governments. He says that the state of nature is a violent place with no lows. In the state of nature there is no business, no account of time, buildings, and there is always danger around the corner. For Hobbes the “state of nature” was a savage place that could only be fixed by laws, there is only peace when there is no war and no war is a place with laws. Hobbes came to the conclusion that humans cant live in groups without law. Hobbes was…

    • 1500 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Hobbes

    • 843 Words
    • 4 Pages

    Hobbes argues that when there is no government or civil authority in place, humans are living in a state of nature. This state is what Hobbes calls a war, “of every man against every other man” (Leviathan pg.106). Since there is no order in place, everybody can then claim anything they want for themselves. To Hobbes, this war is a result of three different causes. Hobbes claims that humans are, for the most part, physically equal. He acknowledges that some people are stronger than others are but we are all individuals who have basically the same mental reasoning, and are vulnerable. This means that a competition results among any person or group of people any time that they want something. For example, if I wish I had something that somebody else is in possession of already; and this person is bigger and stronger than me, I can get a few friends together and physically take whatever it is that I wanted. War also arises out of panic, or attacking somebody for fear that they are about to attack you; a pre-emptive strike. So, if I think that somebody wants to take something of mine, I may take something of theirs before they have a chance, and harm them for the purpose of protecting myself. The third cause of war is glory, or the desire to be feared and have a good reputation, to put fear into people to stop attacking you in the future.…

    • 843 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Religion: Want and God

    • 764 Words
    • 4 Pages

    The rules was created with the purpose of protect a person or nature and to respect each others. Our planet have a lot of rules that we need to follow, even when some peoples believe they live without rules or with freedom they are wrong because everything in the world is controlled by rules such as rules of laws or rules of society that we need to follow if we want to be good. If anybody do not agree with the rules and they brake any of this rules they can end up going to jail. A world without rules will be a chaos because everybody start doing whatever they want because people can not survive without conflict or fighting. A conflict exist because everybody think different and have different opinions abut things or life For example without the safety food act law people can get sick when you are going out to eat or even in sports without a referee players will end up fighting each others.…

    • 764 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Good Essays
  • Good Essays

    Thomas Hobbes was an absolute monarchist that believed human beings were organisms that were in constant motion, and needed to have some sort of authority or restraint, so they could be stopped from pursuing any selfish act. In contrast to John Locke were he believed in a democratic rule and constitutes that human nature was identified by reason and tolerance. The political ideology that Hobbes obtains is precise regarding the following points: people are naturally born with rights but must give up any right to the monarch so in return they receive protection, humans are naturally wicked, cruel, inhumane and selfish, no individual can be trusted to govern themselves and cannot maintain order, and the main purpose of a government body is to implement law and order. It is normal to be in a state of war knowing the reality of human nature, being in constant conflict amongst…

    • 497 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays
  • 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

    Hobbes views on society are when men live without a power to keep them all under control; they are in a condition, which is called war every man against every man. In such conditions, there is fear of danger,…

    • 407 Words
    • 2 Pages
    Good Essays