ipl-logo

Hobbes State Of Nature Case Study

1453 Words6 Pages

Q1. Hobbes’ state of nature is a dreadful place with no way to enforce social rules. It is an unpleasant place revealing that everybody essentially needs the same basic resources to survive (equality of need) and that these basic resources are scarce and difficult to produce (fundamental scarcity). Hence we will have to compete for them (equality of power). And since human beings are naturally selfish and egoistic, nobody will look after the needs of others (limited altruism) (Rachels, 2011, p. 83). Together, these characteristics make the state of nature a miserable place to be in.

The underlying assumption is that human beings are naturally selfish, meaning that they want to maximize self-benefit; and are rational in nature, implying that people know what is in their best interests and understand the effective way to attain that which maximizes their benefits. This selfishness and rationality then unveils the disbenefits of the state of nature and hence create a desire for humans to escape from the state of nature.

According to Hobbes, in order to escape the intolerable state of nature and to gain mutual benefit, selfish rational people would choose to cooperate with each other, also proven by the Prisoner’s Dilemma (Rachels, 2011, pp. 87-88). This requires people to make …show more content…

One common attack against Hobbes’ Social Contract Theory is that some groups of individuals cannot possibly benefit us. Thus, we rational, selfish beings should not enter into a contract with them as the point of a contract is self-interest and benefit. Since we do not need to enter into any social contract with them, there are no rules of morality that we need to respect for them. Hence, no contract suggests no rules and no rules means no morality. This implies that we have no moral obligations towards these non-benefiting groups and can treat these individuals in any way whatsoever. These vulnerable groups include human infants, animals and future generations (Rachels, 2011, p.

Show More
Related
965 Words | 4 Pages

Hobbes believed that “it is not possible for people to have both freedom and peace, since the state of freedom is a state of unlimited greed and war.” (Document C). i believe that hobbes is right about how there are many selfish people and if it came down to you or them, who would you choose? It is most likely that one chooses to save themselves because at a certain time it comes down to survival. Hobbes thought that we should have a ruler such as a king or queen because “democracy- allowing citizens to vote for government leaders- would never work.

Read More
1015 Words | 5 Pages

Self-preservation is the protection of oneself from harm or death, a basic instinct that humans have. The millennial generation refers to individuals born between 1980 and 2000. Rob Fournier in his essay “The Outsiders: How Can Millennials Change Washington If They Hate It?”,argues that the only way Millennials will engage in Washington is if they change it. David and Jack Cahn in their introductory chapter to When Millennials Rule offers a solution to this issue by asserting that young people will use their votes to radically change Washington and win the war against the Washington elite.

Read More
1541 Words | 7 Pages

People’s memories are greatly affected by preconceptions and the emotions that come with them. When one’s memories are challenged the response is that they must be right, and everyone else must be wrong. Dr. Neil Degrasse Tyson shows this example when during his show “Cosmos” where he inaccurately uses a quote from two different speeches of President George Bush’s to express a science of how stars were named. The quote was implying prejudice tendencies in Mr. Bush right after 9/11, and when Dr. Tyson was confronted of his misinterpretation his overconfidence of his memories he instantly configured that the confronters were incorrect. After evidence proved of his misconception, he admitted to his mistake and publicly apologized.

Read More
1602 Words | 7 Pages

In the condition of nature, where man is put at war against man, no security is conceivable and life is brimming with terror. In any case, two common interests empower individuals to get away from the condition of nature; Hobbes’ refers to them as trepidation and reason (pg.108). Angst makes man need to get away from the condition of nature; logic demonstrates to him a method to get away. Reason gives the laws that Hobbes creates, which constitute the establishment for peace.

Read More
624 Words | 3 Pages

Hobbes believed that natural state of humans was violent and therefore needed order and control to ensure a just and equal society (Robinson 2016, 4). However Hobbes believed that a sovereign could maintain power without deceit and manipulation. Hobbes believed in the social contract which is when people could have a moral understanding about right and wrong to avoid the chaotic violent human nature. Hobbes believed in the idea of utilitarianism which would “maximize the most good and minimize the pain” (Robinson 201, 4). This would ensure that the sovereign was doing things for the right reasons and not to better himself but to better society as a

Read More
1591 Words | 7 Pages

According to Hobbes, a sovereign, whether the sovereign was placed into power by violence or force, is the only way to secure law and order. For him, if a citizen obeys the sovereign for fear of punishment or in the fear of the state of nature, it is the choice of the citizen. According to Hobbes, this is not tyranny; it is his idea of a society that is successful, one that does not have room for democracy. As a realist, Hobbes has a fierce distrust of democracy and viewed all of mankind in a restless desire for power. If the people are given power, law and order would crumble in Hobbes’ eyes.

Read More
2000 Words | 8 Pages

Thomas Hobbes in his Leviathan and Jean-Jacques Rousseau in his Discourse on Inequality and Social Contract each attempt to explain the rise of and prescribe the proper management of human society. At the foundation of both philosophies is the principle that humans are asocial by nature, a precept each philosopher interprets and approaches in a different way. Hobbes states that nature made humans relatively “equal,” and that “every man is enemy to every man.” Life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short,” he says, and “every man has right to everything.” Rousseau outlines primitive asocial man having “everything necessary for him to live in the state of nature” from “instinct alone,” and being “neither good nor evil.”

Read More
1441 Words | 6 Pages

Both social contract philosophers defended different views about moral and political obligations of men living in the state of nature stripped of their social characters. The state of nature illustrates how human beings acted prior to entering into civil society and becoming social beings living under common legitimacy. The state of nature is to be illustrated as a hypothetical device to explain political importance in the society. Thomas Hobbes, propounded politics and morality in his concept of the state

Read More
1437 Words | 6 Pages

Hobbes viewed state of nature as a state of war. According to Hobbes, in a state of nature, there is no right to property because no one affords another that right. He stated that property and possessions would inevitably cause men to become enemies. Hobbes believes that people have equal physical and mental ability to harm, and that people will do so for three reasons - competition, difference, and glory. " so that in the state of nature of man, we find three principal causes of quarrel, first, competition; secondly, difference; thirdly, glory" (Hobbes 2008, p.85).

Read More
838 Words | 4 Pages

Summary Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) theory of social contract, which states that we need moral, legal rules because we want to escape the state of nature which is solitary, poor, brutal, nasty, and short. In this state, a man can kill others, and there are limited resources. This can soon lead to a state of war in which we are constantly disposed to harm others to achieve our goals. So, in this state of war if a person was to possess a beautiful house or property, and had all the comforts, luxuries, and amenities to lead a wonderful life; others could come and harm him and deprive him of his fruit of labor, life, and liberty. Therefore, the state of nature is that of fear, violence, and distrust.

Read More
1881 Words | 8 Pages

Thomas Hobbes has been famous for his philosophies on political and social order. In many of his scholastic works, he maintains the position that in the presence of a higher authority the duty of the rest of mankind is to simply obey. The discourse on this essay will focus on his views expressed in his book The Leviathan. In this book Hobbes’ views are fundamentally entrenched in his description that in a society with no higher authority life would be nasty, short and brutish (?) .This essay will engage in discussion by first laying out the conceptual arguments of anarchy and the human state of nature.

Read More
431 Words | 2 Pages

Ethical Issues Regarding Gentrification and Displacement Carys Davies A close look at most American cities over the past two decades quickly reveals rapid development and change within neighborhoods which have frequently been ignored and under resourced. Residents of cities such as Cleveland, New York, Chicago, Boston, and Washington, DC have been subject to the ups and downs of the processes of urban renewal, revitalization, and gentrification. It is simple and most comfortable for the vast majority of the politically empowered upper class population to see gentrification as simply a catalyst for essential community improvement. What is frequently ignored are the severe consequences for the community members, particularly long time residents

Read More
1351 Words | 6 Pages

Hobbes holds that “it is impossible to subjugate a man without first having placed him in the position of being unable to do without another.” Thus, the lack of organizational interdependence in primitive society prevents inequality. Similarly, the lawlessness of early society makes conflict impossible: war “can exist neither in the state of nature, where there is no stable property.”

Read More
1740 Words | 7 Pages

Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau have become known as three of the most prominent political theorists in the world today. Their philosophies and innovative thinking is known worldwide and it has influenced the creation of numerous new governments. All three thinkers agree on the idea of a social contract but their opinions differ on how the social contract is established and implemented within each society. These philosophers state, that in order for the social contract to be successful people need to give up certain freedoms in order to secure fundamental protections from the state, henceforth the state then has certain responsibilities to their citizens. Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau all believe that before men were governed we all lived in a state of nature.

Read More
1251 Words | 6 Pages

The secondary literature on Hobbes's moral and political philosophy (not to speak of his entire body of work) is vast, appearing across many disciplines and in many languages. There are two major aspects to Hobbes's picture of human nature. As we have seen, and will explore below, what motivates human beings to act is extremely important to Hobbes. The other aspect concerns human powers of judgment and reasoning, about which Hobbes tends to be extremely skeptical. Like many philosophers before him, Hobbes wants to present a more solid and certain account of human morality than is contained in everyday beliefs.

Read More

More about Hobbes State Of Nature Case Study

Related Topics

Open Document