Hobbes argues (that is, tries to prove) that logic and human nature make control by overarching central power the only way to achieve social order.
This is hierarchy insofar as it involves power differentials — differences of rank (that is, they are ordered). The basic idea is that two actors are able to make a trustworthy contract because a more powerful third party will enforce the contract. This idea can be extended to produce a "tree" diagram.
Introduction
What is a contract? The short definition "A contract is a legally enforceable agreement between two or more parties with mutual obligations" (wikipedia). How does this compare to a promise?
If a Covenant be made, wherein neither of the parties performe presently, but trust one another; in the condition of meer Nature, upon any reasonable suspicion,it is Voyd: But if there be a common Power set over them both, with right and force sufficient to compell performance; it is not Voyd. For he that peformeth first, has no assurance the otehr will performe after; because the bonds of words are too weak to bridle mens ambition, avarice, anger, and other Passions, without the feare of some coercive Power; which in the condition of meer Nature, where all men are equall, and judges of the justnesse of their own fears, cannot possibly be supposed. And therefore he which performeth first, does but betray himselfe to his enemy; contrary to the Right (he can never abandon) of defending his life, and means of living.
In the state of nature, if two parties make a contract about future behavior, any little suspicion can void it. The person who performs first has no guarantee the other party will do her part because mere promises are too weak to control human behavior unless there is some power that will back it up. In a natural state where individuals are more or less equal, such a power cannot be assumed. Thus, the person who performs first is putting herself at too much risk and this runs contrary to the basic idea that one may not thus expose oneself to potential harm.
NOTE: we might understand this last part a little better when we think in terms of the fiduciary duty a person has to a corporation (though this begs the question of what backs up that obligation).
Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)
Hobbes is a contemporary of Descartes and Galileo. Leviathan is written in 1651. It’s written in the midst of the English Civil War (1643-1646) a struggle between parliament and Charles I. The question of the day was about monarchy as over against republic as form of state organization. Undermining the absolute monarch might be progress, but the chaos the followed gave rise to question about whether social order can survive without authority.
Hobbes basic model was that individuals are mutually dangerous ==> band together ==> contract ==> civil society ==> need for authority that has power over all. Man should give up natural liberties for artificial peace. Although not the first to articulate these ideas, he is generally cited as the foundation for the “humans fall into disorder without government” and “government involves transfer of power from individuals to sovereign” lines of thinking.
Zero Order Outline
Of Reason and Science
Of the Difference of Manners
Of the Naturall Condition of Mankind, as Concerning Their Felicity and Misery
On the First and Second Naturall Laws and of Contracts
First Order Outline
Of Reason and Science
Reason What It Is
"In summe, in what matter soever there is place for addition and subtraction, there is also a place for Reason; and where these have no place, there Reason has nothing at all to do" (88.9).
Hobbes has just run through the basic logics of a number of human endeavors and suggested that there is an analog to addition and subtraction in each. As such, these endeavors (e.g., geometry, logic, political economy, law) make use of reason.
Reason Defined
"For reason, in this sense, is nothing by Reckoning (that is, Adding and Subtracting) of the Consequences of generall names agreed upon, for the marking and signifying of our thoughts; I say marking them, when we reckon by our selves; and signifying, when we demonstrate, or approve our reckonings to other men" (89.2).
Hobbes defines "reason" as the working out of the consequences of things in the world. This does not sound quite like "causal analysis" but it would seem to mean a consideration of what will follow from a given state of affairs. This shares some of our sense of rational behavior being that which is oriented to picking out the best means to attain a given end.
OF THE DIFFERENCE OF MANNERS
What is here meant by manners
Manners not etiquette, but qualities that permit social order.
Happiness in life is not the sating of all desire.
No such thing as "greatest good" (that trumps our desires?)
One cannot live if one stops desiring.
Happiness is continual consumption of things desired.
We are oriented not just to immediate gratification, but longer term guarantee of ongoing gratification.
Everybody wants such, but diversity of passions and knowledge, mean that we have different ideas about how to get it.
Steven Smith, Introduction to Political Philosophy (PLSC 114) at Yale University (2006)
This is an introduction to the political views of Thomas Hobbes, which are often deemed paradoxical. On the one hand, Hobbes is a stern defender of political absolutism. The Hobbesian doctrine of sovereignty dictates complete monopoly of power within a given territory and over all institutions of civilian or ecclesiastical authority. On the other hand, Hobbes insists on the fundamental equality of human beings. He maintains that the state is a contract between individuals, that the sovereign owes his authority to the will of those he governs and is obliged to protect the interests of the governed by assuring civil peace and security. These ideas have been interpreted by some as indicative of liberal opposition to absolutism.
00:00 - Chapter 1. Introduction: Thomas Hobbes
07:28 - Chapter 2. Who Was Hobbes?
14:12 - Chapter 3. Comparing Hobbes to Machiavelli and Aristotle
25:26 - Chapter 4. Hobbes on Art, Science and Politics
33:55 - Chapter 5. Hobbes' "Great Question": What Makes Legitimate Authority Possible?
40:32 - Chapter 6. What Makes Hobbes' Story a Plausible Account of "The State of Nature"?
Hobbes' most famous metaphor, that of "the state of nature," is explained. It can be understood as the condition of human life in the absence of authority or anyone to impose rules, laws, and order. The concept of the individual is also discussed on Hobbesian terms, according to which the fundamental characteristics of the human beings are the capacity to exercise will and the ability to choose. Hobbes, as a moralist, concludes that the laws of nature, or "precepts of reason," forbid us from doing anything destructive in life.
Lecture Chapters
Hobbes on Individuality [00:00:00]
Hobbes' Skeptical View of Knowledge [00:09:49]
The State of Nature [00:14:11]
Pride and Fear: Passions that Dominate Human Nature [00:23:14]
The Laws of Nature [00:29:09]
The concept of sovereignty is discussed in Hobbesian terms. For Hobbes, "the sovereign" is an office rather than a person, and can be characterized by what we have come to associate with executive power and executive authority. Hobbes' theories of laws are also addressed and the distinction he makes between "just laws" and "good laws." The lecture ends with a discussion of Hobbes' ideas in the context of the modern state.
00:00 - Chapter 1. Introduction: Hobbes' Theory of Sovereignty
06:00 - Chapter 2. The Doctrine of Legal PositivIsm: The Law Is What the Sovereign Commands
23:14 - Chapter 3. Hobbesian Liberalism
32:10 - Chapter 4. Hobbes and the Modern State
What is the argument of the text? Just to get a sense of how to do this, let’s look at it step by step:
Nobody is so physically strong as to never be challenged and people are even more equal than that in terms of mental capacity.
Everybody wants similar things and two wanting one thing can become enemies. You build something, an invader takes it, and then the same thing happens to him.
(a)There is really no way to protect yourself, (b) but it is OK to try. (c) Some try to conquer more than is really necessary to be safe, though, and (d) others, happy with what they have, will get trampled in the process, so (e) you have to let folks go for dominance.
Three causes of quarrel: (a) competition, (b) diffidence (distrust, hesitance resulting from lack of confidence, shyness), (c) glory and so these mutual invasions happen for gain, safety, and reputation.
Without common power to fear ==> all are in a state of war and if you have to survive based only on your strength, life is very unpleasant.
Is there empirical proof of this? Think about taking a trip. Don't trust strangers. And no laws can help with strangers until people agree on a lawmaker.
Without sovereign, in the "natural state," it's a war of all against all; there is no law, right, justice, no sense of ownership ("mine and thine distinct").
BUT passion plus reason CAN help us out…
Fear of death and desire of comfort and hope by industry to get these things > can give up some rights > "contract" of peace > laws of nature.
For Hobbes, individuals give up power to a sovereign, but he does not suggest that there is a process whereby they can get it back. Government does, for Hobbes, possess the sovereignty and more or less permanently.
You should memorize two quotes from Hobbes:
"The life of man is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short…."
"bellum omnium contra omnes" (= war of all against all)
Reason as Reckoning
Jeniferiz
R010
87.1 According to Thomas Hobbes, reasoning is just adding and subtracting or multiplying and dividing to get a total.
Jeniferiz
R010
87.2 The total of our reasoning helps us figure out the consequences of our actions.
Jeniferiz
R010
87.9 There is always a place for reason. Without reason we have nothing.
CDunlap01
R010
88.5 Where there is math there is reason.
a Desire is natural
The "good life" does not mean cessation of desire; Power does not, in itself satisfy
Jeniferiz
R010
89.2 We all have different desires/interests, but we all want a peaceful life. Hint of social contract?
CDunlap01
R010
89.4 it is human nature to have a want/desire for power
Jeniferiz
R010
89.6 Mankind has a difficult time being content with what they have. We always want more.
CDunlap01
R010
89.7 it is human nature to have a want/desire for power
b Of obedience and reciprocity
Jeniferiz
R010
90.1 Men who are content are more likely to be happy with a common power. Men who are needy/unhappy are more apt to war
CDunlap01
R010
90.3 Men desire a common power, other than their own, for protection
soc116
R010
90.9 Debt to equal makes one hate; debt to superiour makes one love; payable credit to inferior makes one love — a bit fast and loose
CDunlap01
R010
91.1 Man must expect revenge or expect forgiveness. Both are hateful.
CDunlap01
R010
91.2 Man must turn to society to secure life and liberty.
Jeniferiz
R010
91.2 When we are oppressed, we look to society for help.
CDunlap01
R010 91.3 Religion is used to explain things man fears.
Jeniferiz
R010 91.4 In order to explain natural causes we attribute them to God.
Jeniferiz
R010 91.7 dReligion was born out of things that we fear.
c Equality > Diffidence (distrust) > War
Because humans basically equal in strength and intelligence they cannot trust their security to their might or their wits.
soc116
R010
93.3 Life is no fun if you constantly have to worry about fighting.
Jeniferiz
R010
92.2Natural cond. mankind = They will gang up on each other to protect themselves.
CDunlap01
R010
92.7 If men want what other men have is causes war. War is inevitable between men.
Jeniferiz
R010
92.8 If a man desires what another man has = War
Jeniferiz
R010
93.5 Men fight for 3 reasons, power, safety, and reputation.
CDunlap01
R010
93.6 Common power = Peace
CDunlap01
R010
93.6 War is caused by competition (invade for gain), diffidence (…for safety), and glory (…for reputation)
Jeniferiz
R010
93.7 If all men agree to one power instead of individual power there would be peace. This sound like a social contract…
d War > no industry, no art, no culture
e Proof in Everyday Attitudes
Look around: we are always on our guard. Proves this IS our theory of human nature (94.4)
Jeniferiz
R010
94.1 State of nature = every man for himself. Anarchy! Life will be solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.
Jeniferiz
R010
94.3 We all have to agree on who will make the laws, if not, the laws cannot be made.
CDunlap01
R010
94.4 Actions are not a sin if there is no law to forbid them. In order for there to be laws a common person must create them.
CDunlap01
R010
94.4 Natural condition of man kind, without social control, would consist of war, violence, death
CDunlap01
R010
94.4 Natural condition of mankind, w/o social control, would consist of war, violence, death.
Jeniferiz
R010
94.5 If we fear no common power it will create civil war.
Jeniferiz
R010
94.8 Where there is no common power there are no laws or justice.
CDunlap01
R010
95.2 Fear of death creates peace among men.
Jeniferiz
R010
95.2 Some reasons men want peace is because they are afraid to die. Articles of peace = Laws of Nature
CDunlap01
R010
95.4 Laws of nature affirms self preservation and go against self destruction.
Jeniferiz
R010
95.4 The right of nature = we have the right to defend ourselves, but should be seeking peace.
CDunlap01
R010
95.7 Laws of nature are known by all because of their ability to reason.
CDunlap01
R010
96.2 1st Law of Nature: to want peace fulfills our right to defend ourselves
Jeniferiz
R010
96.4 2nd Law of Nature - laws and peace must be agreed upon by all to work.
CDunlap01
R010
96.5 2nd Law: social contract, must agree on terms for it to be successful
Jeniferiz
R010
96.8 All men have rights and we have to respect the rights of others.
f Contracts
V IMP: contracts only make sense with power behind them (cf. Durkheim on power of the social)
Jeniferiz
R010
97.3 Since we cannot trust a mans word, We must have contracts to ensure that we keep our word. Must also b conseq. for break
Jeniferiz
R010
97.5 Part of the contract is that men should be punished fairly.
Jeniferiz
R010
Competition for power, wealth, glory, or honor = War
Jeniferiz
R010
Part of the contract is men must be punished fairly.
Q233.Hobbes sees social order as impossible without hierarchy. Address both the question of coordination and cooperation (to see the cooperation here, we might think about Adam Smith’s notion of bartering as a means by which two actors can both get what they want) as you explain how Hobbes gets from his assumptions about human nature to the need for a “Leviathan” if human-kind is to achieve social order.
Hobbes, from "Leviathan"
“So that in the first place I put for a general inclination of all mankind a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death. And the cause of this is not always that a man hopes for a more intensive delight than he has already attained to, or that he cannot be content with a moderate power; but because he cannot assure the power and means to live well which he hath present, without the acquisition of more” (89).
“Hereby it is manifest that, during the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war, and such a war as is of every man against every man” (93).
“In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain, and consequently no culture of the earth, no navigation nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea, no commodious building, no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force, no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time, no arts, no letters, no society, and, which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (93-4).
“If a covenant be made wherein neither of the parties perform presently but trust one another, in the condition of mere nature, which is a condition of war of every man against every man, upon any reasonable suspicion, it is void; but, if there be a common power set over them both with right and force sufficient to compel performance, it is not void” (97).
Q383. Define the following words/phrases as used by Hobbes
felicity (89.3)
laudable actions (90.5)
redound … to their posterity (90.6)
thraldome (90.7)
hope of requitall (90.8)
secret machination (92.2)
Prudence (92.3)
diffidence (92.6)
cattell (93.5)
dommage (93.5)
Cardinall (94.8) Jus and Lex (95.7)
Covenants (97.7)
Q384. Hobbes suggests that in a state of "warre" "there is no place for Industry…no culture…no Navigation…no commodious Building…no Knowledge…." (93.9). Explain how this can be translated as "none of the benefits of cooperation."