Hobbes And The State Of Nature

In order to be a man, you have to be violent. Violence is something you are taught. You are taught from people who are showing you what it means to be a real man. You have to act all tough and “cool” and show no emotion, except anger. If by any chance you show any signs of emotion, you are embarrassed and called names such as “bitch”. Being embarrassed shows you to “man

Thomas Hobbes was a philosopher from England whose work and ideas have arguably made him the founder of modern political philosophy. His most famous work is the Leviathan, which he wrote in 1651. In it he describes his view of human nature and hence his view of government. Hobbes’ view of justice is based on his view of what he names the state of nature and the right of nature. Hobbes defines the state of nature as a “war” of everyone against everyone. Hobbes describes the right of nature to be self-preservation. Justice, in order to appease both the state of nature and the right of nature, is then a human construct created out of our drive for self-preservation, at least according to Hobbes. He defines justice as the keeping of valid or enforced

A state of nature is a hypothetical state of being within a society that defines such a way that particular community behaves within itself. English philosopher Thomas Hobbes proclaimed that, “A state of nature is a state of war.” By this, Hobbes means that every human being, given the absence of government or a contract between other members of a society, would act in a war-like state in which each man would be motivated by desires derived solely with the intention of maximizing his own utility.

Thomas Hobbes describes his views on human nature and his ideal government in Leviathan. He believes human nature is antagonistic, and condemns man to a life of violence and misery without strong government. In contrast to animals, who are able to live together in a society without a coercive power, Hobbes believes that men are unable to coexist peacefully without a greater authority because they are confrontational by nature. “In the nature of man”, Hobbes says “there are three principal causes of quarrel: first, competition; secondly, diffidence, thirdly, glory” and then he goes on to list man’s primary aims for each being gain, safety and reputation (Hobbes, Leviathan, 13, 6).

It is said that up to thirty thousand men may have died at the battle of Hastings, a conflict that occurred almost one thousand years ago. World War II, which lasted less than seven years, has been estimated to be responsible for up to forty million deaths. Thus, many people often ask the question why? Why does such conflict occur? Who or what is responsible? The culprit does not hide nor has it escaped scrutiny and blame. It comes in many shapes and sizes, faces and places. It is called violence and the potential for it resides in every single person on this earth. Whose violence conquers all? It is hard to measure the significance of violence, especially when it can cause so much destruction and death as well as stimulation. However,

	Leadership is a prevailing force in life, because one’s ability to guide and direct a group determines the outcome of that group’s actions. Those who lead the strikers in the novel In Dubious Battle by John Steinbeck manifest the idea that some leaders use violence and the thirst for revenge to augment the spirit of their group. Violence is one tool of which the leaders of the strikers use to give vitality to their group. The leaders feel that the intense nature of violence is what provokes the group most out of the aspects of violence. Mac comments, "Some things I do know, though. A smell of blood seems to steam ‘em up. Let ‘em kill somethin’, even a cat, an’ they’ll want to go right on killin’. If there’s a fight, an’ our guys get first blood, they’ll put up a hell of a battle." The leaders feel the intensity as London, Mac and Jim discuss, "I cold-cocked Burke… I seen you pointin’, an’ I know what to do with ‘em. A little blood set the guys off." (p. 331) The violence exacted by London brings the strikers to the level at which they are willing to go into battle. Because violence is such an effective device, leaders like Mac look at moments of violence as desirable opportunities. Some leaders also use the desire for revenge to gain exuberance from their group. This desire for revenge stems from the desire to look out for those who are victims of power. Mac explains,

Thomas Hobbes was a divisive figure in his day and remains so up to today. Hobbes’s masterpiece, Leviathan, offended his contemporary thinkers with the implications of his view of human nature and his theology. From this pessimistic view of the natural state of man, Hobbes derives a social contract in order to avoid civil war and violence among men. Hobbes views his work as laying out the moral framework for a stable state. In reality, Hobbes was misconstruing a social contract that greatly benefited the state based on a misunderstanding of civil society and the nature and morality of man.

Hobbes suggests three causes of the nature of man. First, competition; Second, Diffidence; third, glory. Human exercise violence first to gain their desire, and secondly to defend their gains, and lastly for one’s own reputation. On the ground that we are all in a state of war, Hobbes states, “In such conditions, there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain…no knowledge of the face of the earth, no account of time, no arts, no letters, NO SOCIETY, and which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death…” (Leviathan, XIII). Therefore, the idea of justice or injustice cannot have a place in our society where there is no power.

Thomas Hobbes claims that in a state of nature, people are constantly fighting against each other, and the only way to overcome this is to form a commonwealth. He does this by going over the conditions that describe a state of nature, certain rights that all people have in nature, and the method for transferring these rights, by way of a pledge to a sovereign, whether it to the one person, or a group of people in order to achieve a state of peace. While Hobbes makes a very clear argument, it does contain some faults when examined. Hobbes addresses these issues and tries to convince the reader that a commonwealth is the only way a society will experience lasting peace.

Hobbes state of nature equals to anarchy. Instead of nature, there is nothing that exists that can stop simply stop someone from killing or hurting someone except for power. If one is stronger than the other then they can take from one who is weaker and there is nothing that the weaker person can do about it. This means that man is man’s own enemy. The weakest team while play The Game of Risk was the red team. In this game, they actually did the complete opposite of Hobbes theory. Instead of just dying off they sacrifice their turn and retreated away from the enemy. Instead, they let the two opposers fight and kill each other so that they can have a possibility of winning the game. Although they didn’t win the game the red team did show that

In Book I of chapter XIII, Of the Natural Condition of Mankind, as concerning their Felicity, and Misery, Hobbes talks about the three principal causes of quarrel, competition, diffidence, and glory. The first, competition, is for gain. Hobbes describes it as,” The first use violence, to make themselves masters of other men 's persons, wives, children, and cattle…” (Hobbes Chapter 13). In other words, competition causes men to use violence to steal from one another, which leads to war. Diffidence is described as safety, and the final cause of fighting is glory, which is reputation. Hobbes says in the text, “the third, for trifles, as a word, a smile, a different opinion, and any other sign of undervalue, either direct in their persons or by reflection in their kindred, their friends, their nation, their profession, or their name” (Hobbes Chapter 13).

Opposite to Augustine, Thomas Hobbes believes that the laws set what is wrong and without laws there would be no right or wrong. In Hobbes book Leviathan, argues government is an artificial part of life. Without government, we would be in the “state of nature”. In the state of nature, we are in a condition of war. Hobbes argues that in the condition of war “every man against every man, this also is consequent; that nothing can be unjust. The notions of right and wrong, justice and injustice, have there no place. Where there is no common power, there is no law; where no law, no injustice. Force and fraud are in war the two cardinal virtues” (Hobbes 79). Without any government and laws, there is no justice. There is no room for the cardinal virtues in the condition of nature, as there is only the need to survive. Murder, stealing, and any other action is perfectly justifiable to survive. The right to whatever we want is our natural right and no action is unjust This raises an important issue on why have laws in the first place. Hobbes argues that are motive to establish law is for the security of a man’s person, in his life, and in the means of so preserving life as not to be weary of it” (Augustine 82). In the theoretical condition of war, life is a living hell and is a struggle to survive. By establishing law, we avoid this condition of war and total anarchy. Hobbes argues that we have laws just for our protection and not because an action is naturally unjust.

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.

In Hobbes book Leviathan, he makes the natural man out to be a self obsessed monster who is only interested in his own self preservation. This would intern leave the state of nature to be consumed with war, “...because the condition of man is conditions of war of everyone against everyone”. With out the constrain of government Hobbes states “So that in the state of nature man will find three principal causes of quarrel: first, competition; secondly, diffidence; thirdly, glory” (Leviathan, 76). These principles would then leave men in the state of nature, with a life that Hobbes describes as “solitary, poor nasty, brutish, and short” (Leviathan, 76). Over all Hobbes view on the state of nature is a materialistic world where without an “absolute sovereign” the life of man would be nothing more then the “state of war”.

In fact, Hobbes considers the state of war as a condition of “every man against every man” (Hobbes, 2010: 88) rather than the actual “act of fighting” (Hobbes, 2010: 88). That is, people start to act against each other, thereby transforming the state of nature into a state of war, rightly because of all the reasons considered in the previous paragraphs. Indeed, if human beings are naturally free and equal and compete against each other to gain the same scarce goods, they will likely come to anticipate an attack because of distrust and glory. Evidently, Hobbes’ description of the state of nature and war discloses how he conceived human behaviour and nature as