Lecture 22 Notes

Document Actions

— filed under: Introduction to Philosophy, Philosophy

Humanity and the State

Plan of the Lecture

I.    The Natural Condition of Humanity
II.   The Generation of the Commonwealth
III. The Power of Sovereigns By Institution
IV.   Hobbes's Legacy

I. The Natural Condition of Humanity

A. People are Naturally Free and Equal

There is rough parity of physical strength.
There is rough parity of intellectual ability.
There is no naturally or divinely constituted authority.
There are no shared moral standards.

B. The Consequences of Our Nature

"...war of every man against everyman" (Chapter 13)
"...life of man is everywhere solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short" (Chapter 13)

C. Evidence supporting Hobbes’s account

The evidence is not historical, archeological, or scriptural.
Our question: does it fit with our behavior, intuitions, and knowledge of history?

II. The Generation of the Commonwealth

How do people in state of nature institute an absolute sovereign?
What motivates people to alter their natural condition?

A. People Want to Leave Natural Condition, and Must Know How To Do So

It is natural to fear death and lesser evils, to desire things "necessary for commodious living" (Chapter 13). Therefore those in state of nature have these fears and desires. Therefore those in the state of nature want to leave it behind.
Those in state of nature are rational; they are capable of figuring out how to leave the state of nature and secure their lives. They are also capable of apprehending the law of nature.
Contrast the law of nature in Aquinas and Hobbes. For Aquinas, the natural law is part of God’s plan for the universe, contained in that part of morality knowable by reason. For Hobbes, the law of nature consists of rules of rational action that prescribe what it would be prudent to do to attain end, for example, the rules of prudent conduct to get into medical school.
Crucial precepts of law of nature:

"every man ought to endeavor peace, as far as he has hope of attaining it" (Chapter 14)
"that a man be willing, when others are too, as far-forth for peace and defense of himself as he shall think it necessary, to lay down his right to all things, and be contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himself" (Chapter 14)

Given (1) and (2), we will agree with others to quit fighting if they will too.

B. Problem

What holds people to their agreements? How can we be sure that others will stop fighting?

"it is no wonder if there be something else required besides covenant to make their agreement constant and lasting, which is a common power to keep them in awe, and to direct their actions to common benefit. The only way to erect such a common power as may be able to defend them from the invasion of foreigners and the injuries of one another... is to confer all their power and strength upon one man, or upon one assembly of men, that may reduce all their wills by plurality of voices unto one will, which is as much as to say, to appoint one man to bear their person, and everyone to own and acknowledge himself to be author of whatsoever he that so beareth their person shall act ... and therein submit their wills, everyone to his will, and their judgments to his judgment. ... as if every man should say to every man “I authorise and give up my right of governing myself to this man or to this assembly of men, on this condition, that thou give up thy right to him, and authorize all his actions in like manner”. ... This is the generation of that great Leviathan, that moral god to which we owe our peace and defense. For by this authority, ... he hath the use of so much power and strength conferred upon him that by terror thereof he is enabled to conform the will of them all to peace[.]"

-LEVIATHAN, Chapter 17

Important Points:

Hobbes is not making a historical claim about how the various governments actually came to be. Whether or not some government originated by contract is irrelevant to Hobbes’s argument.
Hobbes is making a claim about what sort of government is best given the kind of creatures human beings are. By human nature we are prone to violence, greed, and religion. Given that, when institutions are badly structured, we are naturally prone to revert to our natural condition.
In order to argue that absolute sovereignty best given human nature, Hobbes looks at our natural condition, the state of nature. Hobbes argues that absolute sovereignty would be best choice.
To defeat Hobbes, one must refute either the account of the natural human condition, or the choice of absolute sovereignty.

III. The Power of Sovereigns By Institution

A. Enumerated Powers Include the Following

The Sovereign can establish laws of property and of justice.
The Sovereign has the "right of judicature"--to decide controversies between subjects.
Subjects cannot change form of government.
The Sovereign's power cannot be lost by breach of covenant with God or the people.
Subjects cannot accuse the sovereign of injustice.
Subjects cannot punish the sovereign.
The Sovereign decides what doctrines and opinions--including religious doctrines--may be taught or published.

B. Powers Indivisible

"if he transfer the militia, he retains the judicature in vain, for want of execution of the laws; or if he grant away the power of raising money, the militia is in vain; or if he give away the government of doctrines, men will be frighted into rebellion with the fear of spirits. And so if we consider any one of the said rights, we shall presently see that the holding of the rest will produce no effect, in the conservation of peace and justice, the end for which all commonwealths are instituted." (Chapter 18)

C. Contrast with American system

The defense of absolutism does not commit Hobbes to monarchy. His view is consistent with an absolute government with a complex structure. Therefore, the fact that we don’t have a monarch does not itself imply that the American is departure from the Hobbesian view.
The real difference is that supreme power is impossible to locate in the American system:

Power is retained by the people to change the government.
The liberty of the people, notably religious liberty "American experiment", was never before tried on large scale.
The divisions of power between state governments and national government together with the three coequal branches of national government decentralize supreme power.

C. The American System Works Because of Political Culture

Hobbes could not foresee responsiveness to political pressure; allegiance to liberal democracy; and voluntary compliance (e.g. US v. Nixon).

III. Hobbes's Legacy

A. Relations Between States

Hobbes thought human beings were social atoms who voluntarily united to form nation states with sovereign borders. He denied that the world is a spiritually united Christendom. He pays little attention to nationalism and claims of empire.
Nation states are in state of nature with respect to one another.
Later thinkers and diplomats, from Richilieu to Gorbachev, try to work out terms of peace among sovereign states.

B. Internal Structure of States

States are thought of as result of a voluntary contract among free, equal individuals. This is a persistent idea in political philosophy.
Hobbes defended a different internal structure than we would because there are workable political cultures that he could not foresee. This democratic political culture has proven workable in lucky places.
Hobbes set in motion intellectual forces that formed our democratic political culture.

C. The Dissipation of Hobbes’s legacy

We have witnessed the eclipse of the nation state, as well as the reassertion of national and ethnic identities. On top of this are mass migrations and the flight of refugees across national borders. We have also seen the rise of regional economic unions.
The problem internal to liberal political culture is that it doesn’t maintain the conditions necessary for own survival.

*Read the Gospel of Matthew as background to Dostoevsky--any version of the Bible will do.

Copyright 2008, by the Contributing Authors. Cite/attribute Resource. administrator. (2006, September 19). Lecture 22 Notes. Retrieved September 05, 2008, from Notre Dame OpenCourseWare Web site: http://ocw.nd.edu/philosophy/introduction-to-philosophy-1/Lecture%2022%20Notes.html. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Course Contents Introduction to Philosophy Home About the Professor Syllabus Calendar Lectures Sample Writing Assignments Exams	Personal tools Log in Register You are here: Home → Philosophy → Introduction to Philosophy → Lecture 22 Notes
	Info Lecture 22 Notes Document Actions — filed under: Introduction to Philosophy, Philosophy Humanity and the State Plan of the Lecture I. The Natural Condition of Humanity II. The Generation of the Commonwealth III. The Power of Sovereigns By Institution IV. Hobbes's Legacy I. The Natural Condition of Humanity A. People are Naturally Free and Equal There is rough parity of physical strength. There is rough parity of intellectual ability. There is no naturally or divinely constituted authority. There are no shared moral standards. B. The Consequences of Our Nature "...war of every man against everyman" (Chapter 13) "...life of man is everywhere solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short" (Chapter 13) C. Evidence supporting Hobbes’s account The evidence is not historical, archeological, or scriptural. Our question: does it fit with our behavior, intuitions, and knowledge of history? II. The Generation of the Commonwealth How do people in state of nature institute an absolute sovereign? What motivates people to alter their natural condition? A. People Want to Leave Natural Condition, and Must Know How To Do So It is natural to fear death and lesser evils, to desire things "necessary for commodious living" (Chapter 13). Therefore those in state of nature have these fears and desires. Therefore those in the state of nature want to leave it behind. Those in state of nature are rational; they are capable of figuring out how to leave the state of nature and secure their lives. They are also capable of apprehending the law of nature. Contrast the law of nature in Aquinas and Hobbes. For Aquinas, the natural law is part of God’s plan for the universe, contained in that part of morality knowable by reason. For Hobbes, the law of nature consists of rules of rational action that prescribe what it would be prudent to do to attain end, for example, the rules of prudent conduct to get into medical school. Crucial precepts of law of nature: "every man ought to endeavor peace, as far as he has hope of attaining it" (Chapter 14) "that a man be willing, when others are too, as far-forth for peace and defense of himself as he shall think it necessary, to lay down his right to all things, and be contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himself" (Chapter 14) Given (1) and (2), we will agree with others to quit fighting if they will too. B. Problem What holds people to their agreements? How can we be sure that others will stop fighting? "it is no wonder if there be something else required besides covenant to make their agreement constant and lasting, which is a common power to keep them in awe, and to direct their actions to common benefit. The only way to erect such a common power as may be able to defend them from the invasion of foreigners and the injuries of one another... is to confer all their power and strength upon one man, or upon one assembly of men, that may reduce all their wills by plurality of voices unto one will, which is as much as to say, to appoint one man to bear their person, and everyone to own and acknowledge himself to be author of whatsoever he that so beareth their person shall act ... and therein submit their wills, everyone to his will, and their judgments to his judgment. ... as if every man should say to every man “I authorise and give up my right of governing myself to this man or to this assembly of men, on this condition, that thou give up thy right to him, and authorize all his actions in like manner”. ... This is the generation of that great Leviathan, that moral god to which we owe our peace and defense. For by this authority, ... he hath the use of so much power and strength conferred upon him that by terror thereof he is enabled to conform the will of them all to peace[.]" -LEVIATHAN, Chapter 17 Important Points: Hobbes is not making a historical claim about how the various governments actually came to be. Whether or not some government originated by contract is irrelevant to Hobbes’s argument. Hobbes is making a claim about what sort of government is best given the kind of creatures human beings are. By human nature we are prone to violence, greed, and religion. Given that, when institutions are badly structured, we are naturally prone to revert to our natural condition. In order to argue that absolute sovereignty best given human nature, Hobbes looks at our natural condition, the state of nature. Hobbes argues that absolute sovereignty would be best choice. To defeat Hobbes, one must refute either the account of the natural human condition, or the choice of absolute sovereignty. III. The Power of Sovereigns By Institution A. Enumerated Powers Include the Following The Sovereign can establish laws of property and of justice. The Sovereign has the "right of judicature"--to decide controversies between subjects. Subjects cannot change form of government. The Sovereign's power cannot be lost by breach of covenant with God or the people. Subjects cannot accuse the sovereign of injustice. Subjects cannot punish the sovereign. The Sovereign decides what doctrines and opinions--including religious doctrines--may be taught or published. B. Powers Indivisible "if he transfer the militia, he retains the judicature in vain, for want of execution of the laws; or if he grant away the power of raising money, the militia is in vain; or if he give away the government of doctrines, men will be frighted into rebellion with the fear of spirits. And so if we consider any one of the said rights, we shall presently see that the holding of the rest will produce no effect, in the conservation of peace and justice, the end for which all commonwealths are instituted." (Chapter 18) C. Contrast with American system The defense of absolutism does not commit Hobbes to monarchy. His view is consistent with an absolute government with a complex structure. Therefore, the fact that we don’t have a monarch does not itself imply that the American is departure from the Hobbesian view. The real difference is that supreme power is impossible to locate in the American system: Power is retained by the people to change the government. The liberty of the people, notably religious liberty "American experiment", was never before tried on large scale. The divisions of power between state governments and national government together with the three coequal branches of national government decentralize supreme power. C. The American System Works Because of Political Culture Hobbes could not foresee responsiveness to political pressure; allegiance to liberal democracy; and voluntary compliance (e.g. US v. Nixon). III. Hobbes's Legacy A. Relations Between States Hobbes thought human beings were social atoms who voluntarily united to form nation states with sovereign borders. He denied that the world is a spiritually united Christendom. He pays little attention to nationalism and claims of empire. Nation states are in state of nature with respect to one another. Later thinkers and diplomats, from Richilieu to Gorbachev, try to work out terms of peace among sovereign states. B. Internal Structure of States States are thought of as result of a voluntary contract among free, equal individuals. This is a persistent idea in political philosophy. Hobbes defended a different internal structure than we would because there are workable political cultures that he could not foresee. This democratic political culture has proven workable in lucky places. Hobbes set in motion intellectual forces that formed our democratic political culture. C. The Dissipation of Hobbes’s legacy We have witnessed the eclipse of the nation state, as well as the reassertion of national and ethnic identities. On top of this are mass migrations and the flight of refugees across national borders. We have also seen the rise of regional economic unions. The problem internal to liberal political culture is that it doesn’t maintain the conditions necessary for own survival. *Read the Gospel of Matthew as background to Dostoevsky--any version of the Bible will do. Copyright 2008, by the Contributing Authors. Cite/attribute Resource. administrator. (2006, September 19). Lecture 22 Notes. Retrieved September 05, 2008, from Notre Dame OpenCourseWare Web site: http://ocw.nd.edu/philosophy/introduction-to-philosophy-1/Lecture%2022%20Notes.html. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.	Reuse Course Download this course or reuse in OpenOCW. Download this course Export into OpenOCW

Sections

Personal tools