ipl-logo

Thomas Hobbes: What Makes A Just And Fair Society

1500 Words6 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Thomas hobbes ideasand beliefs essay

People for hundreds of years have asked what makes a just and fair society. One person who endeavored to answer this question was Thomas Hobbes. Thomas Hobbes claimed that freedom was good but security is better. He also believed that without government, laws, and society mankind would exist in a state of nature where life would be nasty, brutish, and short. To solve this problem Hobbes believed in creating a social contract and hand over their freedoms to a strong leader. The concern Hobbes points out is that from handing over most freedoms to a strong leader could result in a frighteningly powerful state. From Hobbes idea however three questions about what makes a just and fair society arose. First is the Society safe? Second does …show more content…

Slaves fighting obviously illustrates the lack of safety, anyone fighting is a lack of safety because in every fight someone gets hurt or even killed. The use of the word sacrifice proves even more that Rome lacks safety because sacrifice means killing something and in this case “Something” is a living, breathing, human. The last phrase of “forced to fight to the death” means that these people are forced into death and a lack of safety, if these people were fighting by choice it might be a little different but these are slaves who are forced to die for their master’s entertainment and profit, if that 's not a lack of safety then what is. A situation similar to this is in Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins is the Hunger Games contestants are forced into combat and forced into death just like the people in ancient Rome who were forced into violence and slaughter. A second phrase from the text that brightly illuminates the total absence of safety in ancient Rome is, “In 404 A.D. a Christian monk named Telemachus jumped into an arena in Rome and tried to seperate the combatants. The crowd went berserk, climbed over the walls and tore the monk limb from limb” (Watkins

Show More
Related
474 Words | 2 Pages

The amount of people dying from plague or invaders, caused the surviving citizens to be afraid, which would impact Rome’s

Read More
965 Words | 4 Pages

Hobbes believed that without a strong government, people experience continual fear and danger of violent death and lives that are solitary, poor, brutish, and short.” This quote is important because many people who are not ruled usually lead to destruction and mayhem. According to hobbes “appointing a diverse group of representatives to present the problems of the common people to the leviathan. These representatives would only have the power to present opinions, since all final decisions would be made by the leviathan.” i imagine that hobbes presumes that the citizens will take advantage of anyone who is seen as a “good” person, this idea can provide the people with a voice and still be able to make the right

Read More
1208 Words | 5 Pages

Hobbes believed that man must escape their state of nature to be protected. Within this social contract the ruler had absolute power over the people which lead to their words and opinions never being heard. Hobbes believed that for the government to function properly, the people must obey the absolute monarchy and accept that their opinions are not being accounted. Hobbes explained, “And therefore, they that are subjects to a Monarch, cannot without his leave cast off Monarchy, and return to the confusion of a disunited Multitude; not tranferre their Person from him that beareth it…” (Hobbes in Perry, 22).

Read More
1053 Words | 5 Pages

There is no government, no authority whatsoever. Every being is born equal and share the right to do anything for their survival. His political theory was based off his idea that all humans are naturally evil and selfish. Hobbes said that this equality leads to war. “...a war of every man against every man.”

Read More
343 Words | 2 Pages

Morals and values were one of the most important factors that kept Rome prosperous, and without it, the empire itself would have crumbled. However, as years passed, Rome’s citizens began to lose their honorable edge. This caused the streets of large, influential cities to become dangerous and infested with crime. Additionally, because the emperors began to get lazy, much of the money used for defending Rome was wasted on lavish parties and coliseum bets. Because of this, many soldiers left the army, seeing as they were not getting paid anymore.

Read More
996 Words | 4 Pages

(Nagle) This shows that the Romans glorified death for the purpose of entertainment. This is what made Rome’s armies so powerful; the soldiers were

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
1343 Words | 6 Pages

Madison McDonald Dr. Travis Montgomery ENGL 2213-02 16 March 2018 Violence in The Aeneid The Aeneid is bursting with violent acts from the beginning to the end. The main character, Aeneas, constantly faces conflict from both humans and gods. Aeneas is a Trojan hero and prince who embodies pietas, driven by duty, honor, and devotion, which makes him an example of an ideal Roman citizen. Aeneas was called by the gods and determined to be a successful founder of Rome, but he faced complications along the journey. In each conflict along the way, Aeneas dealt with fighting and violence and could not find peace until the end.

Read More
493 Words | 2 Pages

One his theories, stated in his book called Leviathan said that people are not able rule themselves because of how selfish mankind is and they need to be ruled by an iron fist. His political theory was that was also stated in Leviathan was that we should respect government authority under all circumstances to avoid violence. Hobbes was scared of the outcome of the social contract which meant people could get rid of the government if they were unhappy with what they were getting. In order to make well with the social contract he states in Leviathan that people should be completely obedient to the government. His reasoning was that if there was no government, there would be chaos.

Read More
1815 Words | 8 Pages

Burke’s Criticisms of Hobbes’ Social Contract Edmund Burke, after a visit to France in 1773, wrote a pamphlet titled Reflections on the Revolution in France (1790) to express his disdain for the events and methods of the French Revolution. Where other political writers of the Enlightenment and Anti-Enlightenment Eras propose theories of politics and government, Burke does not promote a theory, a set of premises, a call to action, or even a succinct conclusion. He rather details his disposition of contractual government and politic science.

Read More
1254 Words | 6 Pages

Humanity has always been defined by our love and our endless pursuit of knowledge.. Most of (if not all) of humanity’s greatest achievements have been obtained due to our never-ending need to know about our universe and everything in it, including ourselves. The study of different sciences, exploring space, learning medicine, attending school - these are all different ways in which we see that, as humans, we strive to learn as much as we can. It’s simply a part of human nature to crave knowledge. We spend our lives chasing education and knowledge, and ultimately, it shapes who we are - both as an individual and as a species.

Read More
1212 Words | 5 Pages

Hobbes developed the ‘social contract theory’, which is the idea that civilians give up some of their freedom and liberty for protection from the leader. This concept, which was used during Hobbes’s time, is still a part of the government today. Hobbes brings down this concept in his world famous book, Leviathan. A picture of a ‘giant’ monarch holding onto a tiny world is used to describe his version of the social contract. The drawing depicts the trade of freedom for safety.

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
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
1084 Words | 5 Pages

Thomas Hobbes proposed that the ideal government should be an absolute monarchy as a direct result of experiencing the English Civil War, in which there was internal conflict between the parliamentarians and the royalists. Hobbes made this claim under the assumption that an absolute monarchy would produce consistent policies, reduce conflicts and lower the risk of civil wars due to the singular nature of this ruling system. On another hand, John Locke counters this proposal with the view that absolute monarchies are not legitimate as they are inconsistent with the state of nature. These two diametrically opposed views stem from Hobbes’ and Locke’s different understandings of human nature, namely with regard to power relationships, punishment, and equality in the state of nature. Hobbes’ belief that human beings are selfish and appetitive is antithetical with Locke’s contention that human beings are intrinsically moral even in the state of nature, which results in Locke’s strong disagreement with Hobbes’ proposed absolute monarchy.

Read More

More about Thomas Hobbes: What Makes A Just And Fair Society

Related Topics

Open Document