Discourse of Civil Government Morals - Term Paper Example

Running Head: Cultural and Ethical Values Cultural and Ethical Values Customer’s Name: Customer’s Course: Tutor’s Name: 2nd November, 2012. Introduction The state of nature was a concept that was presumed by Thomas Hobbes in two of his earlier works in the Leviathan as well as in the book on the Citizen (Hobbes, 1994). The state of nature is often described as a term that is commonly applied in the political philosophy and also in social contract theories with the aim of describing a hypothetical condition that tend to precede various governments (Gareth & Hobbes, 2003). This may be discussed in relation to how legitimate legal institutions would arise from a state of nature and the reasons that would lead to the formation of a government within a society. Thesis statement: based on the argument and discussion on the state of nature it is evident that it is true as Hobbes argument on the state of nature will inevitably lead to a war of all against all. Discussion The time that exists prior to the formation of the governments and which is commonly referred to as “a state of nature” by the political philosophers is termed in the modern scientific era as being actual rather than hypothetical (Paul, 1967). Hobbes’s of the idea that all human beings are equal in faculties of the mind as well as in the body. From this notion of equality and other issue that may arise in relation to the human nature, each issue is naturally in a position to fight the other in that at times when no power to keep them apart, they tend to be in a condition of war in that every man tends to act for his/her own benefit (Tinder, 1991). In that state everyone tend to have a natural liberty or right to undertake any activity that he/she may think is necessary for preserving his/her life. He further states that life would be brutish, poor, solitary and short. He later describes the above natural condition in his book De Cive with a Latin phrase “bellum omnium contra omnes” which means war against all. Hobbes idea of a state of nature is a primarily a theoretical idea of individuals living in a society where no common power of enforcing the authority or laws are available. In such a state all men tend to have a right for everything and no actions can be termed as unjust. It is necessary to note how Hobbes implied with a condition of war and not precisely how we understand it as a continual fighting, instead he viewed it as condition of invariable consciousness of everyone enthusiasm to fight everyone else. In his work, Leviathan, Hobbes purses a theme that is more related to the evils of the civil war as well as the chaos which would accompany it. According to him, life without the protection of the government would be unbearable and thus the need for strong governments so as to ensure that individuals do not end up in a war of all against all since the government implements policies and some rules in place upon which the citizens are supposed to adhere to. This it seems to be a core concept that led to the formation of governments since they tend to offer a sense of security to their citizens. The quintessence of Hobbes view is based on the fact that, with no government in place, the nature of humans would eventually lead us to a severe conflict between every one of us since there would be no laws and rules that govern them. This argument is true, since in states where there seems to be a weak government governing a state of war against all is evident. For example, thus Hobbes believes that political philosophy starts with the learning of human nature. He also suggests that two core aspects exist in the understanding of human nature that is self knowledge and knowledge of the general principles. Hobbes recommends a wide range of things that are related to the state of nature as well as the nature of man when there exists no governing authority. In the state of mature everyone is perceive as a fair game. Everyone is entitled to own everything that seems to be present in the globe when he does not violate any laws when seeking these things (leviathan, 129-30). Locke’s on the other hand argues that human beings are actually naturally good; he argues that a state of nature is the one that exists before civil society (Locke, 1955). He ascertains that would wish to preserve himself and the immediate family members and try as much as possible not it cause any harm on other members. Despite the fact that he does not demy conflict in the state of nature, he argues that it would be short lived and end without all out war (Wolff, 2006). Another assumption that Hobbes assumes is that he presumes that individuals ought to be forward lookers and at the same time realize the benefits of expectancy in his view, their rational does not only play in to their immediate interest, but also in their long term objectives of well being and maintenance of own lives. Ongoing beside this line of conjectures, concerning the innate coherent judgment of individuals, Hobbes asserts that individuals are constantly possible to try to foresee and outsmart the trial of their surrounded by the state of nature, with the aspiration of exploiting their own power and consequently protecting their own endurance. Rousseau takes a stand in support of both of them though not entirely. According to him he not think that state of nature is a state of war or human beings are not entirely bad and also human beings are not naturally moral as Locke tries to asserts (Rosen & Wolff, 1999). Accruing to him moral is only applicable in instance when a civil society is formed (Plamenatz, 1963). Locke on one hand suggested that a state of nature is ruled by moral laws which can be enforced for each and every one of us. He later supplements this with a claim that all of us are initially in state of abundance and not scarcity as Hobbes suggests and with an implied notion that individuals will often be motivated to pursue the moral law. Whereas Rousseau have the same opinion with Locke that Hobbes tend to be wrong in suggesting that the natural condition is in itself a extreme scarcity, and denies that notions of moral motivation and morality have a place in a state of nature. In its place he suggests that compassion can in a way prevent war from occurring and acknowledged that one cannot be able to predict how the natural man can behave by the use of the civilized man. Conclusion This essay began with Hobbes famous portrayal of the state of nature as been a cause to the state of war of all against all. The core idea is bestowed on the idea that individuals are generally motivated by a drive of felicity will inescapably come into conflict due to scarce goods and based on the fact that there exists no governing power, the conflict will shoot up into full war. Some counter arguments were offered in response to the argument that the state of nature will eventually lead to a state of war of all against all. In conclusion nothing genuinely is worthy of being called a state of nature, and in the end, be a situation in which human beings can thrive. Thus a state of nature will inevitably lead to a war of all against all. References Gareth, W. & Hobbes, T. (2003). Moral and Political Philosophy. UK: Lancaster University. Hobbes, T. (1994). Leviathan. 1651. Edwin Curley (Ed.). Hackett Publishing. Locke, J. (1955). Second Treatise of Civil Government. Chicago, IL: Henry Regnery Company. Paul, E. (1967). Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Vol. 4. New York, NY: Macmillan. Plamenatz, J. (1963). Man and Society: Political and Social Theory, Machiavelli through Rousseau-Volume I. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Book Company Inc. Rosen, M. & Wolff, J. (1999). Political Thought. Oxford: OUP oxford. Tinder, G. (1991). Political Thinking. 5th edition. Boston. MA: Harper Collins Publishers. Wolff, J. (2006). An introduction to Political Philosophy. Oxford: OUP Oxford. Read More