Interpretation of Human Nature According to Thomas Hobbes
Human nature has been a hard nut to crack. Various scholars have attempted to explore this phenomenon to enhance its full understanding. There are different schools of thought concerning this topic, and this paper, therefore, seeks to elaborate on the perspective of human nature concerning political philosophy. This paper analyzes Thomas Hobbes’ view of human life in Leviathan and gives relevant insights. Initially, Hobbes talks about human nature. He goes over, in captivating point of interest, why individuals do what they do. The vast majority of his foundations for that nature are Biblical, which helps give the book its strict inclination. At that point, in Part II, Hobbes portrays what makes up a human commonwealth (Hobbes, 23), which is the word he utilizes for “state” or “country.” I saw Part II as the most intriguing and pertinent to the present day. Moreover, he epitomizes how wise and all-around read Hobbes was. In it, he pulls from an extensive exhibit of contemporary and Classical sources.
Leviathan thoroughly contends that the basis of a human commonwealth through social agreement best accomplishes civil peace and social solidarity. Hobbes’ optimal commonwealth is controlled by a sovereign principle answerable for guaranteeing the security of the commonwealth and allowed the outright position to ensure the standard barrier. In his book, Hobbes depicts this common as a “pseudo individual” (Hobbes, 30) and as a body, which mirrors the human body. The earlier release of Leviathan, which Hobbes helped configuration, depicts the commonwealth as an immense social structure worked out of the collections of its residents, the sovereign as its head. Hobbes considers this figure the “Leviathan” (Hobbes, 5), a term derived from Hebrew for “ocean beast” and the reference of an enormous ocean animal revealed in the Bible; the image establishes the authoritative analogy for Hobbes’ principle government. His work endeavors to show the need for the Leviathan to save peace and prevention of civil war.
Hobbes begins to arrange the different strings that he began all through the book. Entitled “Of a Christian Commonwealth.” (Hobbes, 51) it is about how to frame a Christian state. To build up his contention for why such a state is useful and how said the state ought to be run, Hobbes utilizes the part I conversation of human nature, the Part II examination of what a mainstream state is, and his perspectives on profound quality and its requirement. While I could not help contradicting a portion of his decisions, I saw the contentions as captivating.
Hobbes starts his work by thinking about the basic movements of matter, contending that each part of human nature can be established from realist modes. Hobbes brings out the normal state of social, referred to as the condition of the environment as innately vicious and flooded with danger. The shape of nature is the actual “war among humans” (Hobbes, 63) in which people continually look to pulverize each other. This state is terrible to such an extent that human creatures usually look for peace, and the most feasible approach to realize order is to build the Leviathan using the universal agreement.
Finally, in Part IV, Hobbes portrays something contrary to the Christian region. This segment is entitled “Of the Kingdom of Darkness” (Hobbes, 84) and is typically about how blasphemy and non-Christian ways of thinking are harmful to states. Nevertheless, toward the finish of Part IV, Hobbes backtracks a few and depicts how a few parts of the “obscurity” are useful. His contention in that area helped me to remember the political regions of 48 Laws of Power.
Hobbes shows that humans, by nature, require the power to lead good lives and that they will hardly be satisfied with that power they have acquired and, thus, will continually seek for more. Besides, he believes that there is always a new desire following up for things such as glory, fame, sensual joy, ease, and admiration from other humans. He also holds to the fact that according to human nature, all humans are equally created. Every individual is capable of destroying each other similarly since, even though an individual may be dominant than the other, the intelligence or personal trait may replace the weakness. Hobbes postulates that the nature of humanity drives people to look for power. He adds that when two individuals or more are after a similar thing, they automatically become enemies and therefore try to kill each other. This is referred to as war, that is when men oppose each other. He claimed that three things cause conflict; mistrust, glory, and competition.
In each of these scenarios, humans use force to attack their enemies’ regions for either their advantage, safety, or even fame. Without a natural power to bring people together, the human will always be at war against each other, provided the goal of the battle is known. Hobbes postulates that “state of war is the default state of humanity and the peace among human beings is just artificial since it is strongly reliant on the agreement. If a group of humankind has a common interest or common objective, they will not go at war but instead, remain united and so powerful in contrast to those seeking to destroy them. It is important to note that all humans have an interest in their self-preservation.
Power as a Political Consequence that this Political Philosopher Derives from His Understanding of Human Nature
Hobbes’s notion of humankind made him developing his political idea of an ideal government. Politically, Hobbes believed that a natural force is necessary to keep humanity together. This force would be aimed at maintaining the artificial peace among humans and also protecting people from foreign adversaries. This power or authority could be a single man or a group of people that have been appointed by the people. The people will agree amongst themselves to be subjected to the rulers. The people will have to give up their will and follow the will of the rulers who, in turn, will make an assurance of self-preservation. Those in power would have total control over the subjects. Hobbes referred to this type of arrangement as ruler-subject arrangement.
Power, as defined by Hobbes, is “a man’s …present means to obtain some future apparent Good” (Hobbes, 103). It is separated into two kinds; natural power from within intrinsic abilities of mind and body, for instance, strength, intelligence, wit, the ability of art and instrumental power acquired from other people and faculties, for example, association with friends, reputation and money. The everlasting “ perpetual and restless desire for power” (Hobbes, 107) is an outstanding quality that is common among humans. All along with power, the phobia of a new power acting as a counterbalance to the desire for power and stopping people from continuously fighting to acquire more power. The only thing that makes humans go for peace is the fear of injury and death.
The mediation between fear and power is portrayed in human proceedings known as manners. The various kinds of behaviors emanate from confusions of the most effective way of striking a balance between power and fear, and the overlooking of “Proper philosophy” that would grant such valuable information. Fear emanates from the disregard to the root, which humans try to make it up for the same using customs, religion, and authority that are made in a way to dispel the fear. The truth remains that only appropriate philosophy can take away the fear.
How this Political Philosopher Understands of Human Nature Affected My Understanding of Human Nature
This review has enhanced my understanding of human nature as compared to my initial opinion. My initial take was that understanding human life ought to be the obligation of researchers as well as the duty of all humans living in the public eye. It is because it helps individuals from the public in understanding different human practices and social contrasts. While trying to characterize human conduct existing inside diverse citizenry, various gatherings of individuals unexpectedly deciphered human nature. Strict meetings accept that human creatures have spirits, bodies, and are dependent upon judgment dependent on abhorrent and excellent conduct, separately. On the opposite side, those individuals esteemed as perceptive people accept that human nature does not exist. The conviction that the social philosophy reacts to the earth it is presented to. Researcher contends that human life exists from human impulses. Human nature is the condition that makes human creatures to encounter different circumstances, for example, rivalry, forcefulness, and childishness. It is, in this way, coherent to state that human nature has its underlying foundations from the days of yore. Human nature clarifies why someone, in particular, is fit for indicating an incredible achievement, extraordinary love, and care and, at a similar individual, demonstrates ruthlessness to the degree of executing a kindred human being. The subject of human nature stays to be the issue everybody is avoiding endlessly from because scientists have neglected to show its clouded side. They urge people to cherish one another, maintain a strategic distance from pointless debates, and improve the world a spot for human creatures. Nevertheless, people need to find the clouded side of human conduct and suit it.
The analysis of this text has benefit unto my understanding of human nature especially politically, with how power affects relationships among humans and what can be done to resolve social crises in case of any.
Reference
Hobbes, Thomas. Thomas Hobbes: Leviathan (Longman Library of Primary Sources in Philosophy). Routledge, 2016.