Analysis Of Hobbes's View Of Man In The State Of Nature

Superior Essays
In this paper I will be assessing Hobbes view of man in a state of nature and why it is not possible to agree with life in the state of nature if one disagrees with the all-powerful sovereign. Due to the many factors associated with the state of nature and the social contract, if one agrees with such it makes it nearly impossible to disagree with the need for a government with limitless powers. I will argue that if one agrees with life in the state of nature, then they must as well agree with Hobbes in regards to the necessity of an all powerful sovereign. One cannot agree with life in the state of nature and disagree with the all powerful sovereign simply because an all powerful sovereign is needed due to the way life functions in the state …show more content…
Due to all these claims, if humans were left to the State of Nature, humanity would cease to exist due to all the violence this state results in. One of the reasons the State of Nature produces immense violence is due to how each person is equal to one another. If we are all equal, each person possesses the constant fear of another person attacking themselves, which would cause people to become violent and attack others in order to sooth their fears and self preserve. All of this violence causes humanity in the State of Nature to be quite troublesome, which is evident in the causes for quarrel’s. According to Hobbes the principle causes of quarrels are competition, fear and glory and Hobbes states that, “The first maketh man invade for gain; the second, for safety; and the third, for reputation.” (Bailey and Martin, 180.). This means that humans in the state of nature are competitive in order to gain, fearful for one’s own …show more content…
Thus if one agrees with the condition of life in the state of nature, they would also come to the conclusion that a powerful person is needed in order to ensure peace and just civilization. It is also evident that humans in the state of nature are aggressive and selfish, creating a need for a sovereign who can lead them to peace. Hobbes states, “Where there is no common power, there is no law, no injustice” (Bailey and Martin, 181), so if there is no injustice there is no civilization. This means a powerful leader is required in order to create laws and mold what is unjust and just, allowing for peace, civilization and less chaos. Due to the conditions of the state of nature, man will consent to this power, as all human’s desire self-preservation, thus making an all powerful sovereign the proper solution.
In conclusion, after explaining how humanity act in the state of nature, it is evident that a leviathan is needed in order to create justness and harmony throughout society. When one agrees with life in the state of nature, they must also agree that a powerful sovereign is needed. The violence and fear that the state of nature induces, is detrimental to humanity and thus require a higher power that can create peace. A sovereign is the only plausible solution, as humans are naturally self-preserving and will

Related Documents

  • Great Essays

    The beginning of state of nature meaning war. Hobbes wants the society to work together meaning giving some rights up in exchange for protection. “This equality of ability produces equality of hope for the attaining of our goals” (Thomas Hobbes). For example, if two people want something they both can’t enjoy or use then they quickly become enemies. Hobbes view, “A law of nature is a command or general rule, discovered by reason, which forbids a man to do anything that is destructive of his life or takes away his means for preserving his life, and forbids him to omit anything by which he thinks his life can best be preserved” (Leviathan, Chapter 14).…

    • 1796 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    They will continue to do as they please because they do not have consequences to impede their actions. There is no higher power or authority to keep men accountable. The absence of consequences is the very reason why the natural condition contains violence “for amongst masterless men, there is perpetual war” (140). A commonwealth in this term serves as protection for men who concede their powers for the sake of the contract. It is through the commonwealth where men are liberated from the natural condition and into a state of…

    • 1634 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Hobbes believes that a powerful sovereign that is not part of the social contract is the only way to govern people, be in control, and have order in the country; he thinks that because he believes that people will be so fearful of the sovereign and death that they will not cause any problems. However, James Madison, Plato, and Martin Luther King Jr. seem to for the most part disagree with him. I personally disagree with Hobbes, and I agree with Madison, Plato, and King. Hobbes claims that Social unity and Civil peace are established through the commonwealth in the social contract. The State of Nature, in Hobbes’s opinion, is the equal opportunities of ability and desire which creates conflict, which makes people enemies of each others.…

    • 2532 Words
    • 11 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    This ‘inconvenience’ is much preferred as the “perpetual warre of every man against his neighbour, are much worse.” This brings about the emergence of the social contract, where there is either mutual agreement of free individuals under the state of nature to submit themselves to a sovereign or the fear of the power of an existing sovereign. Sovereignty must be unconditional but there is however a contradiction and lack of justification since Hobbes has put forth the argument that there is natural equality of power the state of nature. The ‘first mover’ will only be willing to forgo liberty if others are also willing to do likewise but since Hobbes claims that human beings are egoistic and mistrustful of one another, it is therefore not a rational and viable option under the state of nature. This brings in the need for a second social contract which is the commonwealths by conquest, in which the superior force is used to command obedience to create a new political society. This is illustrative of Oliver Cromwell’s rule where there is de facto authority, in which ‘might makes right’.…

    • 1600 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    If morality is defined as a demarcation between good and evil, then there must be something to say about the importance of valuing the goodness of one’s nation over its destruction. Having already established that Machiavelli makes decisions that favor the majority, one can conclude that his tactics are indirectly moral. Machiavelli consistently delivers his people the necessary resources in order for his civilization to flourish. It is not that Machiavelli completely disregards morality; he would be foolish to do so. Rather, he values the importance of success, which ultimately leads to goodness.…

    • 1948 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This is due to a lack of some common power that is so great, it can keep everyone else in a state of awe and perplexity. Reason, in this state, suggests a contract to reach peace, mainly because of a fear of death. By the contract, individuals invest all the powers and rights in an absolute sovereign. The only right they hold for themselves is the right to preserve their own lives. Now from the intention to the actual formation of a Commonwealth is a question about the laws of nature: What is the law of nature according to Hobbes and why is it rational to follow it?…

    • 1573 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    He believed it essential to base his political philosophy on this conviction . By depicting the state of nature in a descriptive, rather than normative way, Hobbes shows that there is nothing unusual about the passions that drive man towards war against man. This happens because man seeks self-preservation, which requires attaining resources. However, “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 ”, proves this to be problematic since without a common power, man is then his own lawmaker and judge. This entails inevitable conflict when resources become scarce, shown on p. 82, rejecting Aristotle’s idea of man as a social animal, men caring more about conquest than community, according to Hobbes.…

    • 1217 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Of course in the times, we live in now Hobbes logic works better, I feel because nowadays people are very disrespectful and inconsiderate of people’s lives and possessions, even with a president, governor, and police officials so imagine what life would be like without them. Yes, Locke is correct at believing that people should have morals and be able to conduct themselves accordingly; yet, the idea that every man respects the next man 's property without having to say anything is just not reasonable or plausible for this day and age. Although living in John Locke’s perfect self-ruled, equality world would be nice, for the society and day and age we live in now Hobbes ideas work better for…

    • 1022 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    John Locke, on the other hand, takes a whole different viewpoint concerning the state of nature, and thus takes a differing viewpoint on how man and government should interact. Locke 's idea of the State of Nature is more that everyone is equal.. "a state of perfect freedom to order their actions and dispose of their possesions and persons, as they think fit.." (p 80). Locke does not share Hobbes 's idea that men, left to their own devices, would be vicious and contemptable to one another. And this directly affects his ideals of social organization. To tie this…

    • 1081 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Hobbes’ state of nature is not peaceful the way English civil society is for Locke. One must keep in mind that, Locke grounds this claim about the state of nature not being as violent as it is for Hobbes in a claim about human nature, reason, and temperament itself. Locke believes that an ability to perceive and follow natural law is universal, even in a state of nature. A transition to a sovereign state is necessary to integrate interpretation and enforcement of natural law. Hobbes claims people are naturally more passionate and selfish in an immediate, material sense, more afraid of physical harm and thus motivating striking first.…

    • 1225 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays