Thomas Hobbes Modern Authorianism

1326 Words 6 Pages
Throughout time many philosophers have created their own ideas of what our body politic should look like, who should rule, under what extend and as time has passed these ideas have juristically changed. Many philosophers believe that their view is what would be best for all societies. Thomas Hobbes believed in the idea of Modern Authorianism, which is very different than the idea of Modern Reform Liberalism. Modern Reform Liberalism, though this theory does have its flaws as well, is the best method to use when it comes to the running of a stable society. The problem of passionate men is one that all philosophers come to find; the modern authorianism view of this was that we are all self interested, anti-social beings. This is not necessarily …show more content…
Just because we socialize, it does not mean that our self-interest goes away; we would be socializing because of this. Our socializing is because of our own need to succeed; we need others to survive and this survival depends on the connections that we make with others as time goes on. For example we cannot gather all of what we need to live simply by being by oneself we need those around us. Our self-interest is sprouted from this, so yes our problem is that we are all self-interested but we do not have the problem of being anti-social. When running a society and trying to solve the problem of passionate men there needs to be a way to ensure that everyone is acting accordingly. With this Hobbes formed his idea of having a social contract. Citizens would sign a contract giving their rights to a Leviathan. As long as what they did, did not interfere with what the Leviathan viewed as dimmable then they had their freedom. Hobbes defended this idea was saying that it was in a signed social contract and the people have given their consent because of this he also believed that the scope of this rule was unlimited. Even though Hobbes …show more content…
There needs to be equal forms of public services, such as roads, schools, churches, recreational centers and parks. These should all be included in equality because people no matter their economic status should have access to these features. Though it would be okay to have things like private schools, if they were not funded by the state. There would not be entire quality but just equality of opportunity. So the standards of the law, rights and liberties would all be equal to all, no matter their stance in society. With equality there around a society there should also be no inbuilt hate, either political, race, or social wise. In a society where everyone is not required to be inheritably equal there are going to be discrepancies between each class but they should still have the possibilities of moving up in the society. Since there are many ways that one can fall into terrible situations, it would be the job of the government to try to help and maintain this equality even if it is just for a short period. Things such as welfare and food stamps would be supplied but with conditions. The government would help to get individuals back to the place they once were, this helps to maintain equality with a bit of assistance until one is able to do it themselves. Over all the maintaining of equality would be both personal and government wise. Personal because as

Related Documents