Ana içeriğe atla

The Mandatory Need for a Commonwealth in Leviathan


In chapter 17 of Leviathan Hobbes presents his fundamental basis for how commonwealth emerged and why it carries utmost importance. Up until this chapter, Hobbes establishes that the state of nature is similar to a ruthless and anarchic battlefield where there is continual and constant anxiety that a war might emerge. Hobbes argues that such a state of war deprives men of art, commodity, and sense of society and hence should be avoided. According to Hobbes, peace is the ultimate tool for prosperity but to obtain it he asserts that a common and greater power is mandatory. In chapter 17 Hobbes by comparing people with primitive animals, unveils men’s various qualities or deficiencies that give birth to the need for a greater power to govern them namely commonwealth. In this essay, I will argue that the comparison in Chapter 17 establishes that the sophisticated mind of men presents itself as both beneficial and destructive in the sense that it causes conflicts and constant war among people but it also establishes civilizations where people live in peace and prosperity.

In chapter 17 Hobbes explains people’s disposition to question commonwealth particularly when there is peace by pointing out their ability to understand the concept of “injury” and “damage”. He draws this disposition as one of the reasons for conflict and proposes that irrational animals do not have that inclination because they don’t understand the notions of injury and damage. While this essentially portrays men’s sophisticated minds as a curse that drives them to cause conflicts, Hobbes’ concept of value suggests that people’s narrow-minded nature causes conflicts. Hobbes argues that people assess someone’s value by considering mostly the benefits that person gives to them, he says that “The value, or WORTH of a man, is as of all other things, his Worth. price; that is to say, so much as would be given for the use of his power: and therefore, is not absolute; but a thing dependent on the need and judgment of another” (Hobbes 59). He then gives an example that illuminates his reasoning lying beneath the concept of value, “An able conductor of soldiers, is of great price in time of war present, or imminent; but in peace not so” (Hobbes 59). A competent *conductor of soldiers* may not present his significance in the state of peace, but he is still important because he provides an order among the soldiers, and without that order, society would be vulnerable against potential enemies. Therefore, the commander is still beneficial to people but the benefit is not visible in the superficial layer. Thereby, Hobbes’ example regarding a “conductor of soldier” introduces the idea that people may not understand the importance of something if it isn’t clearly visible to them indicating their lack of ability to analyze and use their reason prudently. This is important as it presents men’s lack of ability to reason as a cause of possible conflict with which contradicts what Hobbes argues in chapter 17 by comparing irrational animals with people. Some people may not give value to those who govern the commonwealth because they don’t see a visible benefit coming from them. They may view trumpeting their wisdom and trying to “control the actions of them that govern the commonwealth” (Hobbes 113,) as more rewarding than obeying and honoring the covenant they signed when they entered society. Such obedience can cause civil wars and conflicts. It is thereof, ambiguous whether people disobey the commonwealth in the state of peace because they don’t view it as important in the times when they don’t need it to protect them or because they understand what injustice and damage are. Although one side of the argument relies on people’s deficiency in thinking and the other takes people’s superior intellect as its fundamental pillar, Hobbes would say that both could happen even simultaneously.

.           The comparison between people and irrational animals reveals that people’s sophisticated minds oblige them to have a strong and controlling power that would establish peace and enforce covenants. Irrational animals do not need an external force that would enforce agreements since their order is structured by nature and because of that, they have fewer wars and conflicts. Through this difference, it becomes evident that irrational animals have a more peaceful society subtly alluding to the idea that they are superior to people in this particular aspect. Considering this subtle superiority, it can be proclaimed that people’s sophisticated thinking cursed people to have constant conflicts arising out of the concepts of competition, value, honor, and hatred. Nevertheless, it is also people’s intellect that saved them from self-destruction by forming a civilization that is protected by covenants. In other words, chapter 17 portrays the intellect of people as both a curse and a blessing which further reinforces the idea that intellect or lack of it can present itself as a destructive tool depending on the context.

In conclusion, Hobbes establishes the basis for men and why men are inclined to cause conflict. The inherently intelligent nature of men causes the reasons for wars but it also the intelligence that saves humankind from self-destruction. Chapter 17 reveals what deficiencies and corrupting qualities men have that beget the reason for a commonwealth to govern us. Ultimately, chapter 17 by contemplating on the qualities of men that cause problems implicitly unveil that people can compromise their self-destructive nature by giving out their powers to someone to govern them.

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

Hobbes, Thomas, and J. C. A Gaskin. Leviathan. Oxford:

    Oxford University Press, 1998

Yorumlar

Bu blogdaki popüler yayınlar

Rhetoric in Hobbes' Leviathan

  Hobbes’ Word Play Hobbes argues in favor of a monarch or an oligarch. To be more precise, he is in favor of the idea that multiplicity comes with complexity, harming the integrity of the state. In his opinion, men are mostly power-driven, greedy beings who must surrender themselves to a sovereign power that can spread the terror of punishment. According to Hobbes, this fear of punishment is the only effective motivating force that can keep people from brutally murdering each other. While this Hobbesian idea of the state portrays the sovereign’s subjects almost as though they are slaves, this essay will argue that Hobbes is not fundamentally against liberty and allows it within the constraints of laws. Hobbes's description of liberty suggests that only external impediments are against freedom. He states that liberty is “the absence of external impediments” (189) and, although these impediments may take away man’s power to do what he would, they do not prevent men from using th...

Rousseau on Legitimacy of State

Hobbes'dan sonra Rousseau okumayı Proust'tan sonra Daphnes ve Chloe okumaya benzetiyorum. Proust aşkı öyle yapay, çıkarcı ve öyle çirkin yansıtıyor ki, ondan sonra okuduğun her romana ister istemez Proust'un realist bakış açısından bakıyorsun. Belki de realizm sevdamı bırakmalıyımdır. Hobbes'un determinist bakış açısı da birçok argümanını epey ikna edici kılıyor. Bazen bu bakış açısından kaçmak istiyor insan. Hobbes kimmiş lan, ben ölümlü tanrıya irademi falan teslim edemem, gayet özgürüm demek istiyor. Yine de gel gör ki Hobbes haklı. Nasıl, Kant ödev ahlakında nasıl ki herkes davranışlarının topluma yansıdığını varsayarak hareket etmeli diyorsa, Hobbes da yapılmak istemediğini yapma diyor. Buna karşı çıkmak da biraz zor. Rousseau abi Social Contract'ında denese de Emile kitabındaki ikna ediciliğini devam ettiremiyor gibi hissediyorum. Birazdan okuyacak olduğun yazıda da oldukça soyut fikirler göreceksin ve yer yer kendine e ama niye diye soracaksın. Bil ki ben de ...

Hobbes’ Paradox

Hobbes’ Paradox Resolved According to Hobbes, people are born with passions that ultimately lead them into a never-ending war. They require artificial power to stop killing each other. Unless such a power is erected, Hobbes suggests, leaving the state of nature is impossible since people are not inclined to cooperate and trust each other. The core reason why it is impossible to leave the state of nature is because of the innate passions people have that drive them to be constantly in conflict. Hobbes states that in the condition of nature, “any reasonable suspicion” renders any covenant or promise invalid since “bonds of words are too weak to bridle men’s ambition, avarice, anger, and other passions…” (196). Here, Hobbes highlights the importance of punishments, suggesting that without the motivating fear of punishments, covenants are practically invalid. It is also important to understand what Hobbes means by the condition of nature. He argues that because men are born equal, they...