Laws Of Nature

Improved Essays
First, the end of the commonwealth is the maintenance of peace and the protection against a common enemy. Hence, it is explicit in the purpose of the commonwealth that subjects covenant for the sake of their self-preservation. It follows that covenants that disallow the subjects from protecting their bodies are void (Chapter 14, 29). Second, the commonwealth being a purposive institution, the Sovereign’s management of the polity must align with its end. The Laws of Nature are general precepts meant to guide the Sovereign in his tasks put a better definition of what the laws of nature are and why the sovereign is not bound by them. However, the Sovereign is not bound by law or obligation to follow these tenets. The means used by the sovereign …show more content…
Even though, the sovereign is devoid from accountability and licensed in action, unrestrained morally or legally, by allowing the subjects to retain an inalienable right, Hobbes has given the subjects a measure by which to evaluate the capabilities of the sovereign. Therefore, the lack of an institutional mechanism to bind the sovereign to abide by the laws of nature coupled with the subjects’ right of self-defence might lead to instances of rebellion, though prohibited and unjustifiable, would not be prevented and even provoked.
Since the goal of the commonwealth must ensure the means for self-preservation, Hobbes broadens the concept of self-defence to incorporate normative, reputational, psychological, and corporal precautions. Hence, even though he is advocating for an indivisible, undivided, and unlimited sovereignty, he inadvertently allows the subjects to make private judgements about whether the commands of the sovereign endanger their wellbeing. This translates into a
…show more content…
Firstly, the Sovereign is the sole Judge and Legislator, he has the right to determine all rewards, punishments, and honours (Chapter 20, 3). The absence of a common arbitrator in the state of nature to resolve disputes and reinforce their obedience by the backing of a sword is an impetus for the institution of the commonwealth. Yet, Hobbes also argues that the subjects can chose whether or not to submit to the punishment. He grants the sovereignty the right to command punishments and the subjects the right to disobey the command by virtue of self-defence. Hence, the sovereign power is limited because he is not the final arbiter in the decision-making of the subject. Second, according to Hobbes, the right of self-defence does not justify the emergence of rebellions. In fact, Justice is the keeping of covenant which renders all insurgencies, unjust and illegitimate. However, even though the initiation is prohibited, the right of self-defence permits the perpetuation of rebel activity in the commonwealth. Subjects that have committed a capital crime and expect death can join together and defend one another (Chapter 21, 17). The right of self-defence does not extend to the defense of others in the commonwealth, however, it is prudent for guilty men as well as innocent, in the state of nature, to defend one another to ensure their survival. Hence, after disobeying the punishment commands of the sovereign,

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    This sovereign power will protect the commonwealth by instituting laws and punishments that hold people accountable for their actions. It is meant to suppress the desires of men by maintaining a threat of fear over them. Punishments are established in order to restrain the ruthless ambition men have when it comes to attaining their wants. In the natural condition there is no “visible power” tied to the “fear of punishment” (106). That is why it is necessary to have a commonwealth, or sovereign authority to force people to uphold the contract.…

    • 1634 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    He (the monarch) does not wrong, because lawful/unlawful and good/evil are at the discretion of the will of the sovereign. Locke disagrees and states that the state exists to solely to protect the natural rights of its people. When a government fails to do so, citizens have the right (and even the duty) to renounce their support and even to rebel. Locke opposes Hobbes’s view that the original state of nature was “nasty, brutish, and short,” and that people, by way of a social contract, yielded their rights as to benefit their own self. Locke counters with this, “And hence it is that he who attempts to get another man into his absolute power does…

    • 1322 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    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). Those who debate this subject often mistake right and law to be the same yet they ought to be distinguished. A right is the liberty…

    • 1796 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Locke believed peace is the norm, and should be the norm. We can and should live together in peace by refraining from molesting each other’s property and persons, and for the most part we do. While Hobbes believed men cannot know good and evil, and in consequence can only live in peace together by subjection to the absolute power of a common master, and therefore there can be no peace between kings. Peace between states is merely war by other means. Furthermore, the stand on the social contract is different in Locke and Hobbes’ philosophies.…

    • 992 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    Since the basis of sovereign authority is the will of all individuals, the sovereign should implement logical decisions to maintain civil peace. However, even if the sovereign acts tyrannical, Hobbes argues it is still preferable compared to the state of war; absolute power is required to prevent the condition of war (O’Hara: Tutorial, Jan 28). On the other hand, Locke advocates for a division of powers between an executive and a legislative body. Critiquing the Hobbesian sovereign, Locke argues that arbitrary power can lead to violence and oppression since the sovereign is not bound to the contract (O’Hara: Tutorial, Jan 21). Consequently, the state of nature becomes preferable than absolutism; Locke states it would be absurd if men “take care to avoid what mischiefs may be done…

    • 1399 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Great Essays

    For Hobbes, the purpose of the contract is keep the commonwealth safe and prevent them from turning back to a state of violence otherwise known as the state of nature. There is no ‘moral code’ in the state of nature so men because they are equal by nature may kill one another as the please (Hobbes, 70). On the other hand, Hobbes is aware that even though man is self-seeking, he also has reason and a desire to live. The will to live will lead them to creating a social contract and establish a common wealth. In contrast, Locke does not see the state of nature as chaotic but views it as a family structure; everyone helps one another.…

    • 1563 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Deontology Theory

    • 1315 Words
    • 6 Pages

    It also tells us that we can never use humans as a means to an end, but consider them as unique creatures with human dignity. And finally on categorical imperatives, it dictates us to treat other people as we ought to be treated. Therefore to sum all these we found the collection of social media data, violates the moral law in that the exercise don’t apply morals in both situations. The exercise only focuses on safety and to criminalize somebody, but not considering the innocents and their privacy. The action of collecting social media data is definitely treating people’s information as a means to an end.…

    • 1315 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    What Is Legal Positivism

    • 1678 Words
    • 7 Pages

    The separation thesis suggests that the law and morality are distinct in terms of conception. In this regard, the definition of law should be completely freed from moral ideals. Moreover moral considerations must not be included in the definition of legal terms such as legal validity, laws, and legal systems. Legal positivism suggests that there are no moral constraints on the validity of legal rules. The positivist community agrees that it is possible to have legal systems without moral constraints, but they do not agree on whether there are some legal systems that experience such moral constraints.…

    • 1678 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Disobedience In Society

    • 1172 Words
    • 5 Pages

    As Thoreau stated: “Under a government which imprisons unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison.” Only through creating friction does moral standing start to gain credibility and become a changer in society, one which the government cannot irradiate. A person who will submit to imprisoned for their moral beliefs inherently gives more credible merit to their views than those who cannot commit themselves to such action. In this way, a person; sacrificing the foundational things their society grants them, undermines the regime. Such imprisonment forces citizens to question the validity of the law in question and the government which would imprison ‘dissenters’ without proper measure and method. A counter to this argument would be to point out that when dealing with governments that are not reasonable, the individual may not be expected to place themselves in a situation with such possible harm.…

    • 1172 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Great Essays

    Yet the only way the sovereign can, based on the covenant, wrong his subject is by not protecting them from death. So as long as the sovereign does not directly threaten the lives of his subjects, people are constrained to the covenant. Opposingly, Locke argues that the state of nature is livable as long as people use their universal reason. However, people find themselves turning to a contract in order to escape the three major inconveniences of the state of nature. The first being self-love which restricts a person 's ability to use universal reason when judging offenses against them and their friends (Locke, 275).…

    • 1942 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Great Essays