Colonel James D. Smith

The right to decide one’s own fate within a fair social contract, unmolested by aristocracy or ruled by unjust laws.

According to Hobbes every humane individual acts in their own self-interest, which is guided by

Hobbes’ description of man’s nature as a restless desire for power is the central foundation for the creation of Hobbes’ state of nature. Life in what is considered a state of nature is the nature in the condition without government. Hobbes states the scenario as “the condition of mere nature”(84[18]), a state where no authority exist other than whatever authority, privacy, security or power an individual is able to gain privately by themselves. Under this state of nature Hobbes assigns man a right of preservation of themselves which he calls “the right of nature”(79[1]) where “each man hath to use

“Everyone is governed by his own reason, and there is nothing he can make use of that may not be a help unto him in preserving his life against his enemies (Hobbes, 120).” Thomas Hobbes, who is a considered a rational egoist, makes this point in his book Leviathan. Hobbes believes that the means of person’s actions can only be amounted to how it ultimately affects that person. Our moral duties that we perform in the end, all stem from self-interest, rather than being justified as morally right or wrong. Hobbes states that our desires pit us against one another, and the only way to protect our self-interests is to create a common power that protects the people who consent to it.

Of these natural rights are the right to self, property, safety, and consent. The right to private property or that through which a person owns or possesses can work to create individual responsibility amongst a community. This component is essential to solving a collection action problem, because it allows for the establishment of stricter laws and covenants. Without the basic right to property it becomes easy for the diffusion of responsibility to spread amongst a group. This notion of property and the right to protect it emphasizes the use of enforcement within the state and the responsibility for one’s actions. When an individual becomes responsible for their own property they would naturally feel more inclined to take better care of it. If we separated the west quad equally and allowed for privatization we could essentially kill two birds with one stone by increasing individual responsibility and fulfilling the Lockean

Thomas Hobbes was the first philosopher to connect the philosophical commitments to politics. He offers a distinctive definition to what man needs in life which is a successful means to a conclusion. He eloquently defines the social contract of man after defining the intentions of man. This paper will account for why Hobbes felt that man was inherently empowered to preserve life through all means necessary, and how he creates an authorization for an absolute sovereign authority to help keep peace and preserve life. Hobbes first defines the nature of man. Inherently man is evil. He will do whatever is morally permissible to self preservation. This definition helps us understand the argument of why Hobbes was pessimistic of man, and

After that Hobbes goes on to say, “The life of man is solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short.” (Hobbes) He argues that nothing is unjust in the state of nature. He believes that everyone has the right to do anything he/she wants because in the state of nature, there is no right or wrong and there is no law; everyone can do everything and nothing can be unjust. He says that “ Where there is no common power, no law; where no law, no injustice.” (Hobbes)

In the beginning, there was a darker side to the preservation of life. Man lived a life of kill or be killed, without any regard for other than his own. Life was solitary, poor, brutish and short. This barbaric and primitive state is what Thomas Hobbes believed to be the State of Nature. Practical reason dictates that when threatened you either act, give up your property, or anticipate for a sign of weakness to act. This means that all have a right to everything so long as it can be attained. People cannot be trusted to follow the Golden Rule, or the ethic of reciprocity, seen in many religions as stating that one must do unto others as one would like to be treated themselves.

Human flourishing is best understood and guided by the insights into the nature of things as developed by Hobbes than Locke. In Hobbes view, all individuals are equal concerning body and mind and no one is supposed to benefit more compared to the other person and every person has the liberty and right to do whatever he deems right to protect himself from danger as long as he his guided by the law of reason. In this view, there are no injustices and personal property as there is no law. Locke argues that human beings are free to do what they want as long as their actions do not harm other people. The reason should guide them. Those who harm others should be punished (George, 2010).

English philosopher & Theologin Thomas Hobbes, is generally considered one of the most influential philosophical thinkers of all time. His writings pertain to the understanding of human nature, and the overall effects of the corruptive culturing effects of society. Hobbes advocated the principle that all humans are born with the capacity to be selfish; and in fact it is our basic human instinct to be self-preserving. The existence of this nature of humans, allowed Hobbes to argue for the need of a social contract. The need for this so-called social contract came with the factor of having a need of a ruler. As stated earlier, Hobbes explained how mankind, is naturally self-devoted, and focuses mainly on the needs of ourselves rather than others.

Hobbes then proceeds to his next section, describing how humans were averse to being killed in the state of nature (13). For instance, they agreed to “lay down this right to all things” and give up their right to kill another person to ensure that they do not face a greater aversion, being killed (14). In the end, they were still looking out for their self-interest. Although they had lesser rights, they could now participate in a safer society.

Hobbes, in Leviathan, immediately embarks on an ambitious task: not to explain tedious small morals, but rather “those qualities of mankind, that concern their living together in peace, and unity” (Hobbes, 239). Hobbes asserts that no ultimate goal or greatest good exist; a universal goal in life simply does not exist. Thus, no natural hierarchy can be established with respects to an individual’s capacity to achieve this ultimate good i.e. no one person is naturally better than the rest in achieving some virtuous goal because no such goal exists. The alignment of human existence, therefore, is not towards an ultimate good, but rather to avoid the ultimate evil: death. Therefore, “the voluntary actions, and inclinations of all men, tend,

By reading Hobbes, it was undoubtedly seen that his biggest trepidation was ending up living in a state of nature. For this reason he beliefs that the best way of avoiding state of nature is by not rebelling and obeying to the law. He described it the state of nature as “no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short” . He goes on saying that anyone’s property is the common wealth’s property. It belongs to the sovereign state. He says “That every private man has an absolute Propriety in his Goods; such, as excludeth the Right of the Soveraign. Every man has indeed a Propriety that excludes the Right of every other Subject: And he has it onely from the Soveraign Power; without the protection whereof, every other man should have equall Right to the same. But if the Right of the Soveraign also be excluded, he cannot performe the office they have put him into; which is, to defend them both from forraign enemies, and from the injuries of one another; and consequently there is no longer a Common-wealth.” He claims that the State owns everything in the country and citizens are only legitimate to own as long the State finds it

Nonetheless, based on the findings written by Hobbes, the individual should not be given total freedom to do as he pleases. Acting within self-interest allows for the formulation of greed and exploitation of peerage in the journey to attain more wealth. Neither can total control be beneficial to society. Although this may guarantee total equality, it goes against the natural state of man which may lead to the general population being unsatisfied. One needs only to look at the recent anti-government uprisings in Libya whose leader has ruled for forty-nine years under an authoritarian state administration. As such a balance needs to be found which allows the people some form of freedom whilst providing for state intervention to protect and aid the needy and vulnerable within the society.

A British philosopher and an egoist, Thomas Hobbes believes that humans are selfish by nature. He believes that we are all potential enemies and that we need authorities such as police, the military and courts of law to protects us from each other. He also believes that laws and morality only exist due to fear of living in a state of chaos and conflict. Hobbes describes life without any incentive to be good as “nasty, brutish and short” otherwise known as State of Nature.