Aristotle And Its Rivalry Against Aristotle By Thomas Hobbes

1962 Words 8 Pages
Register to read the introduction… Hobbes’ major achievement to political philosophy is called the ‘social contract theory.’ First of all, Hobbes had a different view of human’s nature as Aristotle to start from. He saw human nature was to be tamed by politics, not exercised. According to Aristotle, The nature of human was to be completed and flourished through community and politics (SEP, 2002). In contrast, Hobbes claims that the state of human nature was war. In his book of Leviathan, he states, “…there is no way for any man to secure himselfe, so reason-able, as Anticipation; that is, by force…till he see no other power great enough to endanger him…” (Leviathan, XIII). Since we cannot reach agreement over what is right and wrong, it is rational to think that we have no choice but to attack other people and that is the state of …show more content…
Aristotle proves his point by mentioning the basic needs of human and by the analogy of craftsmen. It is true, that fundamentally, humans need others for their desires to be accomplished. Humans are only capable of doing one thing (SEP, 2002). For example, humans need male and female to reproduce, and even in other aspects of lives, human cannot accomplish everything by itself. Therefore, being political must be part of nature since we cannot satisfy ourselves alone. On the contrary it seems incoherent for Hobbes to claim that humans’ state of nature is war; because our desire is achieved not only by conquering others or exercising force but also through collaboration. It is not our nature to be in the state of war but to be in the state of war is the failure to achieve and use well of our nature. Aristotle states that ‘A natural being becomes and reveals its nature as it grows, changes and by moving through times’ (SEP, 2010). When observing two children over a toy, first they will start fighting over it but as they grow older and mature, they will choose no to fight over it (war), but to negotiate (politics); however this is not because of our nature, but the lack of deliberate capacity and authority (Politics, 1260a13 and 1254b15), which Aristotle referred as women and slaves in his books. Then why are women and slave naturally unfit for politics? This is likely due to the era he lived in, when Aristotle was alive, slaves existed and women were not part of the political world and that was the norm of the time. It would have been difficult for Aristotle to get over the system imagine beyond of to describe their status. However, Aristotle still manages proves his point by claiming that a natural being becomes and reveals itself as it grows, changes and moving through time

Related Documents