[Read] ➹ Leviathan ➵ Thomas Hobbes – Thegreatwallonline.us

Leviathan According To Hobbes Self Interest Is The First Principle Of Human Conduct Hobbes View This Behavior As The Base Element Of Social Confrontation I Very Much Agree With Hobbes Point Of View As Far As Self Interest Of The Individual Is Concern, I Also Agree With His View Of Human Life As As Being Short, Hash And Brutish His View On Human Nature Is Problematic To Say The Least And I Disagree With His Proposition That Only A Strong Monarch Leader Is The Only Prescription To Avoid Social Chaos

[Read] ➹ Leviathan  ➵ Thomas Hobbes – Thegreatwallonline.us
  • Paperback
  • 736 pages
  • Leviathan
  • Thomas Hobbes
  • English
  • 12 April 2017
  • 0140431950

10 thoughts on “Leviathan


  1. says:

    Not only did I disagree with Hobbes conclusions, I find his assumptions his arguments based entirely in Christian perspective essentially worthless The only value this tract served to me is to know thy enemy This is a classic example of mental circus tricks being used to justify the march of Christian dominance across the globe I can t think of any written text that I despise , except perhaps Mein Kempf.Hobbes is my least favorite philosopher He embodies everything I despise in West Not only did I disagree with Hobbes conclusions, I find his assumptions his arguments based entirely in Christian perspective essentially worthless The only value this tract served to me is to know thy enemy This is a classic example of mental circus tricks being used to justify the march of Christian dominance across the globe I can t think of any written text that I despise , except perhaps Mein Kempf.Hobbes is my least favorite philosopher He embodies everything I despise in Western thought If I met Hobbes in the street I would flash him my tits and then slap him in the face and call him a pervert


  2. says:

    PrefaceA Scheme of ReferenceIntroductionA Note on the TextSelect BibliographyChronology Leviathan, or The Matter, Forme, Power of a Common Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civill Explanatory NotesIndex of Subjects


  3. says:

    Since some reviewers here seem to rate this work unfairly low because of their disagreements, ignoring both the importance of Leviathan and the basic power of the argument Hobbes forwards in it, I ll refer a couple of good, measured reviews with history and backdrop also found here I planned to adapt an essay I wrote at univers Since some reviewers here seem to rate this work unfairly low because of their disagreements, ignoring both the importance of Leviathan and the basic power of the argument Hobbes forwards in it, I ll refer a couple of good, measured reviews with history and backdrop also found here I planned to adapt an essay I wrote at university on Hobbes and Leviathan with comparisons against Locke, Rousseau and others to serve as a review, but it s rather unwieldy and a few of its less esoteric and elaborate points have been made very well and succinctly in some of the accounts above.Hobbes is the most influential figure in political thinking when it comes to what might broadly be called pessimistic philosophy contra Leibniz , and in this sense he makes an excellent,formal and treatise like accompaniment to the works of Voltaire whose philosophical tales especially are, beyond the characteristic wit on display, also immensely enjoyable Kafka, and to certainpersonal extent Beckett, are also commendable reads He doesn t so much set out a modus operandi for a ruler as the Arthshastra or The Prince attempt to do, but tries to justify the power to be accorded a ruler, basically obliterating some of theopen concerns a statesman might have to tactically contend with in Machiavelli But it may be that of all of Leviathan s contributions, the eponymous Leviathan in the sense of an absolute monarch is the superfluous part.Given its age, the language of Leviathan is remarkably clear and precise, emphatic as necessary and quite accessible Hobbes sets out his arguments with almost mathematical proof like care however, and the book may require patience I had lecture notes to guide me through when I first read important selections, and perhaps something of that nature will be helpful.Irecently found it a fascinating exercise to study the thought of this school roughly speaking in the context of modern evolutionary thinking as found in very accessible but also rigorous accounts like The Selfish Gene by Richard Dawkins.Of course, just as science with its empirical concerns does not prescribe but might inform efficient and effective methods for achieving an aim, the pessimists are not prescriptive they simply caution in the way dystopia in fiction doesn t provide constructive commentary as utopia does, but serve when done right, in the manner of Orwell for instance as elaborate warning tales It is wrong to think of them, especially Hobbes, as social Darwinists There is willful misinterpretation on nearly every side of modern politics when it comes to philosophers like Hobbes so that arguments which come from the pedestrian self help esque philosophy of the likes of Ayn Rand or readings that miss the outr humour of de Sade can be cloaked in the appearance of erudition and thus made less incendiary when shamelessly carted out This propensity is far from lessened by the argument in Leviathan for monarchy and the easy clamour citing this gains from those blinded and made to follow complacently by the very term democracy , whether true in fact or not.It is perfectly fair to say that Hobbes, with interests very relevant to him personally in his day, fails to give due consideration to other forms of governance than the one he advocates, but this shortcoming does not invalidate or at all detract from the conundrum he poses about trust within his state of nature , or the dangers of it The situation is akin to the Prisoner s Dilemma from game theory and there is the question of what s rational for the society on the whole against what is rational for the individual at each decision The implications from biology of trust favouring behaviours and the evolutionarily stable equilibria which may come about through such strategies further elucidate our notions on the human condition when considered alongside the basic problem


  4. says:

    Thomas Hobbes, , , 17 , , ,Thomas Hobbes, , , 17 , , ,


  5. says:

    Hobbes s Leviathan appears draconian to most Americans who ascribe to classical liberal values Their rejection of his social contract coincides with an optimistic Lockean faith in the capabilities and moral fortitude necessary for negative liberties to survive This na vet in political legitimacy is analogous to the popularity of the New Testament compared to the Old because, while both texts share equal moral instruction, we fervently prefer a loving and forgiving God to a brutal taskmaster Hobbes s Leviathan appears draconian to most Americans who ascribe to classical liberal values Their rejection of his social contract coincides with an optimistic Lockean faith in the capabilities and moral fortitude necessary for negative liberties to survive This na vet in political legitimacy is analogous to the popularity of the New Testament compared to the Old because, while both texts share equal moral instruction, we fervently prefer a loving and forgiving God to a brutal taskmaster Hobbesian pessimism in human nature is a cold bucket of water tempering our enthusiastic assumption of a free polis because it demonstrates how democratic freedom is contingent upon the behavior everyone demonstrates.My political science professor s ad hominem disparagement of Hobbes as paranoid and neurotic was troubling, given that Hobbes s support for a Leviathan with absolute sovereignty remains a soberly empirical definition of power and fundamental governmental purpose Fear of death is the primary motivation for our surrender to political authority A government s legitimacy therefore necessitates the capacity for retributive action against internal and external threats The power of the individual and group is relational to the behavioral impact they exact on others Individual rights and liberties independent of government remain the exception, not the rule, of most persons throughout recorded history, past and present.How and why do the rights outlined by John Locke, that we often take for granted, exist at all They depend on the internal morality of the individual who receives them, which themselves depend on Enlightenment values held dear by everyone around that person I do not think that we are born blank slates in the state of nature, or cynically view moral sentiments as a vacuous social construct Reading Hobbes s brutal state and laws of nature, however, brought to mind the inculcations of parents, Sunday School instructors and Sesame Street screenwriters Socrates s description of a rational portion of our brain that holds back the appetitive beast within us, for example, is emblematic of an internal Leviathan each individual conscience tacitly consents to for a free society to be possible.The gradual shift in favorability towards democracy, from Socratic aversion to Jeffersonian approval based upon Locke, reflected the piecemeal formation of internal Leviathans that made democracy possible Plato s polemical attack in the Republic against democracy as an ideology suited for morally relativistic pigs made sense, given the amorality of those around him who ignored philosophic truth and diffidently sentenced Socrates to death His opposition to democracy reflected the observable reality of Hobbes s first law of nature, namely an avaricious Tony Montana attitude commonly held towards other individuals and groups at that time Democracy only became a viable alternative to absolute sovereignty after the humble and prudential values diffused by the burgeoning bourgeoisie of Locke s time attained widespread acceptance If the hypothetical man of the state of nature is self reliantly rational and reasonable rather than nasty and brutish, we can entrust him with freedom without risking our security from death.The American middle class is often derisively mocked at my University for the values its members hold dear Their sexual abstention, proudly traditional religiosity, and lowly aspirations for a quiet life of monetary gain with a nuclear family strike many supposed free spirits as an archaic edifice to topple The eternal Hobbesian preeminence of security within us, however, makes it wiser to consider the utilitarian importance of their self restraint for the preservation of any freedom at all


  6. says:


  7. says:

    Though considered to be one of the most influential works of political thought, this manages to be both tedious and frightening tedious because of Hobbes s labored phrasing and protracted reasoning, and frightening because his conclusions have been put into play by stars like Stalin and Pol Pot In brief, Hobbes argues for a strong central government headed by an absolute sovereign Frankly, I can t imagine anyone liking Hobbes, as his take on social contract theory supports the theoretical gr Though considered to be one of the most influential works of political thought, this manages to be both tedious and frightening tedious because of Hobbes s labored phrasing and protracted reasoning, and frightening because his conclusions have been put into play by stars like Stalin and Pol Pot In brief, Hobbes argues for a strong central government headed by an absolute sovereign Frankly, I can t imagine anyone liking Hobbes, as his take on social contract theory supports the theoretical groundwork for constitutional monarchy instead of republicanism But some of his other theories are a bitintriguingly off I d love to have a dinner party with Hobbes and a couple of Romantic poets maybe Wordsworth and Coleridge and ask them what they thought of Hobbes s assertion that imagination is nothing but decaying sense and is the same as memory Maybe throw in Yeats as well That would be evenentertaining than a soiree with Hobbes and Jefferson


  8. says:

    Thomas Hobbes discourse on civil and ecclesiatical governance, he analyses this in four parts, firstly via a discourse of man and the first principles of society secondly he looks at the institution of a commonwealth and varying principles governing such, as here listed The sovereign has twelve principal rights 1 because a successive covenant cannot override a prior one, the subjects cannot lawfully change the form of government 2 because the covenant forming the commonwealth results fro Thomas Hobbes discourse on civil and ecclesiatical governance, he analyses this in four parts, firstly via a discourse of man and the first principles of society secondly he looks at the institution of a commonwealth and varying principles governing such, as here listed The sovereign has twelve principal rights 1 because a successive covenant cannot override a prior one, the subjects cannot lawfully change the form of government 2 because the covenant forming the commonwealth results from subjects giving to the sovereign the right to act for them, the sovereign cannot possibly breach the covenant and therefore the subjects can never argue to be freed from the covenant because of the actions of the sovereign 3 the sovereign exists because the majority has consented to his rule the minority have agreed to abide by this arrangement and must then assent to the sovereign s actions 4 every subject is author of the acts of the sovereign hence the sovereign cannot injure any of his subjects and cannot be accused of injustice 5 the sovereign cannot justly be put to death by the subjects 6 because the purpose of the commonwealth is peace, and the sovereign has the right to do whatever he thinks necessary for the preserving of peace and security and prevention of discord Therefore, the sovereign may judge what opinions and doctrines are averse, who shall be allowed to speak to multitudes, and who shall examine the doctrines of all books before they are published 7 to prescribe the rules of civil law and property 8 to be judge in all cases 9 to make war and peace as he sees fit and to command the army 10 to choose counsellors, ministers, magistrates and officers 11 to reward with riches and honour or to punish with corporal or pecuniary punishment or ignominy 12 to establish laws about honour and a scale of worth got this list from wikipedia but this is in chapter 18 of part one The types of commonwealth are also considered monarchy, aristocracy and democracy so too succession, religion, taxation etc etc.Thirdly, Hobbes considers a Christian commonwealth and governance based on the scriptures , considering discrepancies between scriptural and civil lawFourthy, the kingdom of darkness is considered in reference to ignorance, and the absence of the light of knowledge.Leviathan was written during the English Civil War and Hobbes reiterates his views on sovereignity and social contract theoryOverall I think this was a rather interesting read and would recommend it to anyone who makes politics thier interest


  9. says:

    Leviathan is a major work of philosophy Full stop.It s interesting to think that this book is the fundamental root of a lot of ultra conservative brains On some level, I can understand this Hobbes defends the divine right of royal power to a certain extent and proceeds to define this power as absolute Without question, subjects must bow to their masters, under any circumstances In all this, however, he ultimately says that a monarch s power is granted him by his subjects, for without subj Leviathan is a major work of philosophy Full stop.It s interesting to think that this book is the fundamental root of a lot of ultra conservative brains On some level, I can understand this Hobbes defends the divine right of royal power to a certain extent and proceeds to define this power as absolute Without question, subjects must bow to their masters, under any circumstances In all this, however, he ultimately says that a monarch s power is granted him by his subjects, for without subjects a monarch is king of nothing, decrees cannot be carried out, etc I don t remember the text of the book all that much I read it mostly while on the bus to my job at Domino s Pizza a couple years ago I suppose it comforted me to think that having to deal with my egomaniacal boss was a work of divine devotion, as opposed to an oppressive hell The book did convince me of some truths that needed accepting at the time, that for all the brutality of my boss at work, he would ultimately fall, when his actions became tyrannical enough to convince his employees that he was not fit to rule Which they did forthwith, and he was subsequently fired So they told me Another employee told me he went to work at the Domino s in Federal Way, some miles south of Seattle, which seems like a suitable enough punishment, if you feel like I do about Federal Way i.e why is it there what good is it doing Leviathan changed my life The old timey language and syntax took some getting used to, but it s definitely worth a read


  10. says:

    A Monster of a Book12 Oct 2017 Woah, after three weeks I have finally managed to finish the behemoth of a book which, ironically, Hobbes also wrote a book with that name and I can now move onto something much lighter Anyway, there was a time, when I was younger, when I was dreaming of one day getting married, having children, while becoming a hot shot lawyer is it possible to actually do those two things that I wanted to read this to my proposed child while he or she was still a baby Min A Monster of a Book12 Oct 2017 Woah, after three weeks I have finally managed to finish the behemoth of a book which, ironically, Hobbes also wrote a book with that name and I can now move onto something much lighter Anyway, there was a time, when I was younger, when I was dreaming of one day getting married, having children, while becoming a hot shot lawyer is it possible to actually do those two things that I wanted to read this to my proposed child while he or she was still a baby Mind you, I suggested this to one of my Christian friends, who proceeded to have a heart attack claiming that it was a humanist text similar to the writings of David Hume Mind you, this particular person is now a lecturer in English Literature at Harvard University so I am still wondering why she was hugely shocked at this idea Maybe it had something to do with wanting to read it to a baby Anyway, this is apparently the book that laid the foundation for political science as we know it today, though I am sort of scratching my head at this suggestion First of all people have been writing about politics since people first tossed out their unelected kings and began to argue as to the best way to run a country, Mind you, those particular people, such as Plato, pretty quickly came to the conclusion that letting the mob make the rules on a principle of popularity was a pretty bad idea so decided to go back to the drawing board to work out how they can have a system where smart people actually run the country Mind you, as my Classics history lecturer once told us, the problem with that idea was that all of the smart people actually had much better things to do than running a country Okay, maybe Plato, being a smart person, would have been perfect for that position, but he seemed to end up spendingtime trying to teach rulers how to be a smart ruler, and failing abysmally As it turned out, being a smart ruler isn t a particularly easy thing to do, and in the end it is much easier to collect taxes and then use the said taxes to build palaces and to go around beating up all the people you don t like At least Machiavelli had the right idea Hobbs seems to follow Plato s opinion, though he doesn t go as far as Machiavelli in actually telling rulers how to be successful rulers Rather he spends the time exploring the nature of government, and instead of coming up with unworkable ideas, he basically looks at what is around him, and the traditions of the past, to come to the conclusion that the best form of government is a monarchical government based upon the principles of scripture His theory is basically that because God is sovereign, and because God is the perfect ruler, then ergo the best form of government is that of a Christian king However, as I have mentioned, the book is pretty chunky, and half of it deals with a theological exposition as to why the Bible supports monarchy Well, not quite because he does come back to the point in the book of Samuel where the Israelites demand a king, and the main reason that happens is because the Israelites had decided that living under the constitution that God laid out was just that little too hard, and it seems that all of the nations around them were having a awful lot of fun, so why not just live like them Well, for those of us who know their Bible know how that turned out A little context is probably in order though Hobbes wrote this book during the English Civil war, which was an incredibly messy affair Basically you had the Catholic monarch on one side wanting to do things his way, and the protestant parliament on the other side basically telling him to bugger off and mind his own business Things got messier, and messier, and it resulted in Charles basically having his head lopped off Well, that didn t particularly solve anything because, much like the French revolution, it left a power vacuum Well, not quite, because they did have Oliver Cormwell, but it turned out that they didn t have an effective succession plan in place, and in the end, when Cormwell died, his son took over, with the resultant mess that ended up with them asking the king to come back and take over Hobbes ideas probably won t sit well in our so called advanced Democracies these days, but then again look at who landed up as President of the United States a Reality TV star Okay, he wasn t the only actor to have been elected President, but at least Reagan was a tried and true union man if you consider the Screen Actors Guild a union, but serious it is Mind you, we in Australia can t comment because we elected Tony Abbott a misogynist that when asked what he felt about the LGBT community, the reply was they make me feel uncomfortable Actually, when asked to comment on an Australian soldier that was killed in Afghanistan, he reply was shit happens I kid you not Well, at least you can say that that is the typical Australian response Mind you, while I m no big fan of totalitarianism, you have to admit that this whole democratic experiment, at least in the west, is pretty messed up Well, not quite, because the Germans have seemed to have worked it out quite well, and seem to be chugging along quite happily Even the British seem to have some reasonably level headed people in power and whatever you think of Teresa May, at least she is nowhere near as bad as Tony Abbot, or the Trumpet for that matter Yet, despite Hobbes not really being as applicable to our times, in a way he is He was looking at a country that was in a complete mess and his solution was to go back to the tried and true method a king it certainly had to be better that people running around shooting each other Maybe we could solve our problems by asking Angela Merkel to come over here and sort us out Hey, at least the Norwegians made sure that the mining companies actually paid for all of the minerals they took out of their lands over here we simply let them take them If I were to walk into a shop and start helping myself to all of their goodies I d be arrested I guess that is what the matra of jobs, growth, and opportunity gets you these days

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *