Thomas Hobbes 12 Angry Men

The revolution generated radical changes in the principles, opinions, and sentiments of the global people. New ideas and issues affected political ideas. In addition a new government was also changed. A few of the many enlightenment thinkers were Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, baron Do Montesquieu, and Jean Jacques Rousseau.

With these natural causes of quarrel, Hobbes concludes that the natural condition of humans is a state of perpetual war of all against all, where no morality exists, and everyone lives in constant fear (p.45). He believes that humans have three motivations for ending this state of war: the fear of death, the desire to have an adequate living and the hope to attain this through one’s labor (p.47). These beliefs become valid because of the use of his examples. One example suggests that people are barbaric to each other. With the absence of international law, strong countries prey on the weakness of weak countries. I believe that his views of moral behavior are very true. Like Hobbes said, people are out for their well-being. If I were to do a favor for someone, I may think I am helping someone out, which I am, but I am probably doing the favor because it is going to make me feel better. It is going to benefit my well being. Hobbes is a famous philosopher whose views were very controversial. But the fact that he lived in a time when the monarchy was the “divine right of kings” (p.42), makes his views valid today. With a different government and new laws, his views appear to be true.

Thomas Hobbes was born in 1588 in England. Hobbes survived through the English Revolutionary era, and his perspective of human nature built up negatively. He believed that all men were innately bad and evil. Hobbes stated, “... yet they will hardly believe there be many so wise as themselves” (Hobbes 1). This quote shows his thought, that all men are selfish and they always think they are better than anyone. Hobbes believed that humans didn't know how to cooperate because same desire would only cause them to be an enemy. Also, Hobbes said that it was the human who limits the development due to their constant war with each other.

Set in the 1950’s post depression America and written by world renowned playwright Reginald Rose, Twelve Angry Men has become a much loved classic within the drama playwright genre. With an abundance of audacious themes skillfully displayed throughout the feature length play, Rose has pushed the boundaries of the overly oppressive era from which the play was first published. The two main themes that were explored to great lengths throughout the play were prejudices and stereotypes. These themes were both highlighted through the use of three key literary devices; structure, setting and interactions of characters.

Locke and Hobbes started with a central notion that people with similar “state of nature” would on their own accord come together as a state. Locke believed that individual would not perpetually be at war with each other. He believed humans began with a state of natural characteristics of absolute freedom with no government in site. Hobbes work differs from that of Locke’s because he felt people needed a strong central authority to ward off the inherent evil and anarchic state of man. Locke believed that within the state of nature man would have stronger morals and thus limit their actions. Locke also, credited people with the ability to do the right thing within a group. And the natural rights and civil society where Hobbes differentiated with this by believing that people had to resolve their natural rights and the their were privileges granted by the sovereign. Locke believed the relationship between citizens and government took the form of a social contract, in which in exchange for order and protections provided by institutions the citizens agree to surrender some of the freedoms within the state of nature. This was also, agreed that power of the state was not absolute but exercised according to law. If broken by the state it forfeits and the contract becomes void. This allots for the citizens of the state to have a “voice” and power for change to replace the government with moral obligation by the governed. Hobbes believed absolute power was the price man should

Thomas Hobbes once said, “The passions that incline men to peace are: fear of death; desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living; and a hope by their industry to obtain them.” According to the quote, Hobbes presumed that humans are committed to fulfill their own desires, while remaining ignorant to the effects of their actions. This quote is accurate because in the book The Lorax, Dr.Seuss depicts an antagonist, the Once-ler, who detrimentally impacts the environment to satisfy his gluttony for money.

As Thomas Hobbes asserts in his book “Leviathan”, the foundation of modern society is built on a social contract between states and population to legitimate the authority of the state over the individual. A compromise in such covenants is the renouncement of certain “natural” rights by the citizen in return for the assurance of security. This, however, does not entail the forfeit of every single right and an absolute submission of the people to governmental authority. To ensure human dignity and to prevent emergence of an autocratic governmental system, the Founding Fathers enacted constitutional provisions determining rights of defense against the state. Even though these rights were not part of the original version of the Constitution, they were enacted through the Bill of Rights shortly afterwards as an amendment to the Constitution. One of those fundamental rights is the freedom of press: “Congress shall make no law ... abridging the freedom of speech, or the press”. From the formulation of this provision the Supreme Court established for a long time that this provision would solely apply to the federal government. However, under the doctrine of incorporation, the Fourteenth Amendment imposes the First Amendment prohibitions on the state level. Hence, the First Amendment binds federal as well as state governments.

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.

Self-centered human nature drives men to egotism. Yet in a world of limited resources, as one man strives to satisfy his desires, he naturally diminishes other men’s opportunity to fulfill their own needs, thus creating Hobbes’ third premise: competition. In human nature, “From equality of ability ariseth equality of hope in the attaining of our ends. And therefore, if any two men desire the same thing, which nevertheless the cannot both enjoy, they become enemies; and . . . endeavour to destroy or subdue one another” (Hobbes 75). Men compete with one another to gratify their desires and thus become enemies. Consequently, competition begets jealousy, envy, and hatred, which sparks war among people. Hobbes’ three premises of human nature, equality, egotism, and competition, set the stage for an all out war.

Thomas Hobbes and Niccolò Machiavelli are known to be philosophers whom have helped to develop the views of political power and human nature. Both men had very different views from one another, yet at the same time they did indeed have many similarities. From having opposite views on Political Power, to having alike views on Human Nature, Hobbes and Machiavelli are men whom have shaped political philosophy throughout our time. Through the works of Machiavelli’s, The Prince and Hobbes’ Leviathan their views are clearly portrayed and explained with great depth. These works have helped change the way we see our modern day society.

As Hobbes sees it men are naturally in conflict. Hobbes sees three reasons for this. They are competition, diffidence, and glory. Following from the right of nature, which states that all men have the liberty to promote their own life, men naturally desire to obtain resources so as to promote their own life and obtain some form of the good. Yet there are only so many resources, and so men enter into conflict over competition of who will be able to have the limited resources, since only one person can own each resource. .

Thomas Hobbes believed that man by nature is evil. He however, lived in a time of war

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).

An idea that I found particularly interesting is that of the twenty-first century philosopher, John Rawls. His concept of the veil of ignorance is one that i found very intriguing and found myself wondering how different everything would be if people actually applied it to their actions. Opposed as to Thomas Hobbes, who hadn’t thought of the veil, which made his idea seem a bit more similar to cultural relativism. It was a bit confusing when Thomas attempts to assert that morality is objective in his point of view, that consent of the overall population is what makes something moral. However, what would happen if in different cultures people consented to different things, which makes it a bit too much like cultural relativism in my opinion.

Thomas Hobbes once said, “The first and fundamental law of Nature, which is, to seek peace and follow it.” He wanted us to seek peace because as individuals in society he wanted us to live together in peace. His belief was to circumvent the menace and have fear of civil dispute. However, when we don't fulfill are part in circumventing the menace Hobbes explained it as if when two or more people desire the same thing, people will then become enemies and try to put more of an effort into destroying each other resulting into war. Hobbes stated that there were three fundamental causes for war such as, competition, distrust, and glory.