Hobbes was born in 1588 and died 1679. Leviathan was
written during the English civil war. The book emphasizes one strong leader who
tries to avoid civil war. Hobbes also developed a European liberal mindset such
as the rights of the individual; all the natural equality of people; the
artificial nature of political order. That actually led to the gap between
civil society and the state all legitimate political forces has to be
representative and people should consent it; and the interpretation of the
liberal law that gives people the freedom to do everything that is not
expressly prohibited by law.
to Hobbes, people are physical objects. They are exquisite machines their
functions and activities can be only described and explained in purely
mechanistic terms. Hobbes outlines an organized society from the starting point
of modern dualism: man is both a natural part and a free actor above nature.
While the irreversibility of the release of liberty may seem startling, one can
also think that the freedom of human activity is increased when it does not
itself have to worry about security issues and wonder if another arrangement is
better than the present. Hobbes says that Freedom means lack of resistance. And
then again he says, whenever someone is surrounded, it cannot go further.
“The Law of Nature” is a
general rule that is perceived by cause. Such a law strengthens the survival of
man and condemns the devastating actions of human life. Unlike the civil law
that is to be written and made public so that it is known, the law of nature is
natural and inherently known by everyone. When all the horrors are described in
the state of nature, where everything is scary, Hobbes concludes that a natural
man seeks peace because he wants to preserve his life.
every man, ought to endeavour Peace, as farre as he has hope of obtaining it;
and when he cannot obtain it, that he may seek, and use, all helps, and
advantages of Warre.”1 This is the first law of nature that
It is a natural law; which is to
seek peace and follow it. Hobbes believes that natural law requires that we
seek peace, because seeking peace is to fulfill the natural right to defend
The Second Natural Law monitors the
powers to seek peace: We must abandon certain rights such as the right to take
another human life in order to avoid the state’s natural war. This second law
a man be willing, when others are so too, as farre-forth, as for Peace, and
defence of himselfe he shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all
things; and be contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would
allow other men against himselfe.”ii
This transfer of rights is called an agreement; I give up my right to
kill other people if you do the same so it is a concept of moral obligation. Nevertheless, the right of self-defense is the only one
that can never be handed over.
The unity of peace and society can
best be achieved by creating a social economy through a social contract. Everyone
has the ability to kill others in the state of nature. There is no rules or moral. So it quickly
becomes the state of war where you harm others to archieve your own goals. In
order to avoid this Hobbes wanted moral and legal rules so everything could function.
That’s why they create police, rules against stealing and property rights so
the environment would not be fearful. And everyone should naturally agree to
Contemporary political thinkers
split up into two groups.Those on the right believe that only liberty matters
whether it is in consequentialist or nonconsequentalist way. Those on the
left on the other hand believe that only liberty should not be taken into
consideration but also “material equality” should also matter.
This origination of freedom as
nonintervention likely stems from Hobbes.”A Free-Man,” he wrote in Leviathan,
“is he, that in those things, which by his strength and wit he is able to do,
is not hindred to doe what he has a will to.”iii
People are prevented and made
entirely unfree, for Hobbes, as far as they are physically pressured. However,
he permits that there is a sense in which individuals are rendered unfree
by bonds that force by menace, not by physical means. According to Hobbes in
order to be free signifies not suffering compulsion of the body or compulsion
of the will.
In case we assume that
liberty is not a noninterference but an antipower, we will notice that
if liberty is opposed to
subordination, constitutional authority does not compose of abolishment of
liberty. The idea behind this is that the constitutional authority shall not
take part in interfering opression ot “subjugation”.
In case liberty is built as
an antipower more than noninterferance, at that point we don’t need to see the
rule of law, and all the more by and large of contitutional authority, as
itself an annulment of freedom. In any case, the interpretation of opportunity
as antipower has precisely the opposite impact on judgments about for example,
those that have generally acquired amongst workers and employers,married
couples, etc. “Contemporary thinkers” do not see loss of freedom.They may see
different shortages, obviously—given that there is no real interference.
There is a decent adjust, at that
point, in the connection between the concept of freedom as nonintervention and
the concept of freedom as antipower.
The Hobbesian approach,which I
mentined before ,was rejected with specific power by the cham-pions and
advocates of the American Revolution. These masterminds demanded intermittently
that liberty and subjugation are contrary , both for people and for
individuals, and that liberty needs a nonappearance of exposition to the
arbitrary impedance of others, specifically, the nonappearance of
exposition under rule of law.
The rivals of any semblance of Priestley and Price reintroduced the Hobbesian
thought of noninterference and utilized it to wreck the case for American
freedom. Jeremy Bentham made what he thought was “a sort of
disclosure” that freedom is just the lack of force,he encouraged on the
premise that all government is in certain extent an invasion of freedom.
Hobbes, Leviathan chapter 14 p. 2-3
Leviathan p. 3
Hobbes, Leviathan p. 1