Human Nature and Government - Essay Example

Hobbe's and Plato's views on 'Human nature' and 'Government' Many philosophers investigated the notion of human nature and the place of government inthe society. The contradictory opinions of the philosohers such as Hobbe, Plato, Aristotle, Locke, Rousseau, Kant, Rawls and many other encourages to review the setting of the government in different epochs (Schneewind 1997). For example, Plato, the second othe trio of ancient Greeks laid the philosophical foundations of Western culture, saw man's true nature as rational and believed that civilized society must be organized, and civilized life conducted according to rational principles. Seventeen centuries later, another philosopher Thomas Hobbes invites us to his theory that decribes the society as a state of nature, a condition without government (Richard 1971). Both philosophers defend their theories in their works and prove that people might live better in the state where either they are coordinated "from above" by the government or where each decides for himself how to act, judge and live in the society. This paper compares and contrasts the views of Hobbes and Plato on human nature and government examining their views based on their literary works and other scholarly/literary opinion. Thomas Hobbes and Plato have given us some highly acclaimed philosophical works providing us with their views on various aspects of life ranging from politics to the rights of citizens. Both writers had voiced their opinions in their works in a substantially strong and unfaltering manner. Hence it comes as no surprise that the two had and continue to have a phenomenal affect on the past and present populations. Thomas Hobbes was a master draughtsman who attempted to rearrange the political assumptions of the Renaissance. In Hobbes' vision, sovereignty was the exclusive property of the state, no meaningful distinctions existed between subject and citizen, and liberty was in no way contingent upon self-rule or participation in making the laws that bind polity and populace (Kavka 1986) Plato was a philosopher who believed that human beings possess intrinsic knowledge, which may never affect their senses unless they seek and acquire enlightenment. This is an interesting concept, which dispels the notion that educators can impart knowledge to their students. According to various philosophers, human nature is guided by superego and a relative state of morality. Plato believed that human nature is determined by reason and absolute standards of morality. Through his philosophical works of literature and philosophy, Plato explains the characteristics of good human beings serving their nation well and their respective responsibilities. Harping on the same string, the legendary figure highlights that it is of paramount importance that people of the world comprehend the need to apply wisdom and truth in deciding all vital matters of life. Plato believed that man is a rational being and because of this, reason plays the most important part in developing his nature and assisting him in discovering the highest good or finally attaining self-fulfilment. Plato held the view that man is seen as guided by reason to reach the highest good and attain self-fulfilment (Stevenson 1987). He asserted that changes in human nature are hierarchical in nature where man goes through different stages guided by reason. According to Plato reason is one of the most important components in determining human nature. Plato's deep insight on this issue was that a state consists of individuals and the conduct of these individuals depends on their character. Plato also describes his state of living in peace and harmony due to the fact of having everyone in connection with one another. Upon being asked if they would be united just by lip, as such," For example, in the use of the word 'father,' would the care of a father be implied and the filial reverence and duty and obedience to him which the law commands; and is the violator of these duties to be regarded as an impious and unrighteous person who is not likely to receive much good either at the hands of God or of man Are these to be or not to be the strains which the children will hear repeated in their ears by all the citizens about those who are intimated to them to be their parents and the rest of their kinsfolk' (The Republic by Plato) It should be noted though that Plato was an objectivists because he viewed human actions through an absolute standard of morality where consequence has no influence over choice of action. The argument against the theory presented by Plato is that it is too vague and lacks substance. For example he gives no concrete suggestions on how a person's intelligence and courage can be measured. There is no practicable value of the theory since in reality it is impossible to categorize people and assign them suitable duties. Plato's views on Government were based on the premise that maintenance of a friendly relationship between the government and the people could help attain political stability. According to him political stability can be maintained if both the parties would be friendly and cooperative with each other because such an attitude will remove all the negativity factors and will eventual serve as a tool to maintain political stability in the country. Plato's ideal state is an aristocracy in the sense that it is not be ruled by democratically chosen leader but instead must be governed by the "very best". The lower section of the society must engage in productive asks as they are in a majority and since they lack talent for anything challenging, they should become what he called producers. The middle section, which is somewhat clever, should be assigned the duties of defending the country and they are called "Auxiliaries." The people who are on the very top of the ladder are those who possess extraordinary capabilities and should therefore run the country itself and Plato calls then "Guardians" (David 1986). According to Hobbes, there is always a natural disorder of things, and the only way to keep this disorder at bay was to set up an artificial institution, the government, endowed with enough power to deter violence amongst other things amongst its subjects. Hobbes agreed that our natural liberty can lawfully be replaced by a state of subjection to government. The only legitimate mechanism, according to him is that "all the Rights, and Facultyes of him, or them, on whom the Soveraigne Power is conferred' must be 'conferred by the consent of the People assembled" Hobbes's views on government were largely based on his theory of representative government. As per Hobbes no king enjoys a status any higher than that of an authorised representative and there is no such thing as the body of the people. It is hence obvious in its own sense that much of the criticism of Hobbes from his own day to the present rests on an assumption that the absence of a standard against which to measure the justice or efficacy of the sovereign's expressed will makes arbitrary government the most likely outcome of any attempt to apply the science of justice. Hobbes himself promotes this misconception by asserting repeatedly that tyrannical government is better than no government at all. Sometimes, Hobbes referred to the popular governments of Greece and Rome simply as anarchies. Their intellectual defenders, such as Aristotle and Cicero, he dismissed as nothing more than "enemies to monarchy" (Annas 1991). This judgment may seem obvious to citizens of a modern liberal state, but its provenance is not at all obvious and helps to explain why Hobbes insists, against common sense, that a truly unlimited sovereign is more likely to govern by settled laws than one whose subjects imagine him bound by legal and practical restraints. In Leviathan, Hobbes talks of the peoples having no individual will but to submit to the will of one man or an assembly of men whose will would take shape as the collective will of the peoples. In this way, the one man or ruler of the peoples would be like a mortal god under the authority of the immortal god; and the people of his nation would restrain their own passion for freedom and liberty through resignation of their individuality to the will of the ruler His views on human nature were not as generic as Plato's but were more material driven. In Thomas Hobbes's words, "Every man is presumed to seek what is good for himself naturally and what is just, only for Peaces sake, and accidentally" (Nagel 1959). In this view, sociality is but an afterthought, a "social contract" that our ancestors entered into because of its benefits, not because they were attracted to each other. Thomas Hobbes argued forcefully for the necessity of regulating selfish, nasty human impulses for the good of the larger whole. Although social dilemmas had not been identified as such in Hobbes's time, he clearly saw that the seductive power of social defection was dangerously strong. In Leviathan, Hobbes wrote that "during the time men live without a common Power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called Warre; and such a warre, as if of every man, against every man." (Leviathan) Throughout his career, he maintains that nature provides human beings with a capacity to formulate rules of reason conducive to peace, and also with a desire they be enacted. Realizing this desire, however, requires unitary authority, which must be established either by force or mutual agreement. It is certainly true that Hobbes rejects the medieval conception of reason and natural law as the means by which human communities participate in a cosmic order (Bobbio 1993, 153). We need to understand that although we may not always agree with the views of Hobbes and Plato because of the fact that they wrote in times starkly different from ours, but we can study them to broaden our outlook and to develop a more reasonable approach to various issues. Despite this most commentators agree that Hobbes's rejection of earlier views on reason, nature, and law is one of the critical prerequisites of modern political thought (Ryan 1996, 213-16). Furthermore, Plato's belief and proposal regarding human individuality and freedom of action reflects irrationality. What is obvious is that both Plato's and Hobbes's view although largely affected by their economic, social and political environment have an important standing in the world today. In summary, both philosophers, Plato and Hobbe proved in their works that the society can exist with and without the government that would regulate and control the state of the being among people. Both opinions are considered and appreciated in the modern philosophy today. Works Cited 1. Ashcraft, Richard (1971). 'Hobbes's Natural Man: A Study in Ideology Formation', Journal of Politics, 33, pp. 1076-171. 2. Bobbio, Norberto. Thomas Hobbes and the Natural Law Tradition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1993 3. Cornford, Francis MacDonald The Republic Of Plato. Translated By Francis MacDonald Cornford. Oxford University Press, 1941 4. Hobbes Leviathan Edited Edwin Curley. Hackett Publishing Company 1994 5. Hobbes,Thomas. [1651].Leviathan, ed. C.B.Macpherson. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books. 1968 6. Hobbes.T, Philosophical Rudiments Concerning Govemment and Society, London. Printed by J. C. for R. Royston, at the Angel in Ivie-Lane, 1651, 7. Johnston, David (1986). The Rhetoric of 'Leviathan': Thomas Hobbes and the Politics of Cultural Transformation, Princeton, N.J. 8. Julia Annas, An Introduction to Plato's Republic (Oxford, 1991). 9. Kavka, Gregory S. (1986). Hobbesian Moral and Political Theory, Princeton, N.J. 10. Nagel, Thomas. Hobbes's Concept of Obligation The Philosophical Review, Vol. 68, No. 1. (Jan., 1959), pp. 68-83. 11. Plato. The Allegory of Cave. The Republic. Routledge, 1999. 12. Ryan, Alan. "Hobbes's Political Philosophy." In The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes, ed. Tom Sorell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 208-45 ,1996 13. Schneewind, J.B. (1997). The Invention of Autonomy: History of Modern Moral Philosophy, Cambridge/New York. 14. Stevenson, Leslie. Seven Theories of Human Nature. New York: Oxford UP, 1987 15. The Republic by Plato - Translated by: Benjamin Jowett- Book 5, pages 17-21(Dover Thrift Editions) 16. Warrender, Howard (1957). The Political Philosophy of Hobbes: his Theory of Obligation, Oxford. Read More