Men By Nature Are Equal: Hobbes Works Analysis - Essay Example

essay Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), English Philosopher, who offered stunningly original political theories, argues that the natural equality and the war of all against all lead human beings into political society because of negative human appetite, aversion towards blood and gore and need of security and stability. Revered as the father of modern political philosophy, he lived in particularly troubled times of civil war, Spanish Armada's invasion, unprecedented execution of the King, and his main concern was peace in the society and mostly, his theories deal with this sincere desire. MEN BY NATURE ARE EQUAL: Hobbes vociferously argues that men are born absolutely equal in nature and the slight variations in mental or physical strength, are always equalized by some hidden might and this means that the weakest could destroy the undeniably strongest either by secret conspiracy or open challenge, alone or with the help of fellow sufferers. The originality of Hobbes’ theory starts from this point. He does not deny the man his rights of eliminating his foe directly or indirectly. Instead, he almost imposes man with a natural urge and duty of doing so. He sees the man as an equalizer and he leaves it to the man to choose his weapon1. He allows a man to justify his theory of natural equality. Hobbes finds mental faculties (‘native faculty’) that man is born with as of greater significance, compared to the additional accomplishments (science, for example, that fails to impress Hobbs!) he has attained. He argues that mental capability is of greater equality than physical strength. Faculties of mind could undermine physical strength every time. He is unimpressed by prudence, which he calls another form of experience that one could attain with time and feels that time could not be partial, and all men have to get prudence in equal share2. Basic nature of man never abandons him and even after many accomplishments, it surfaces at unguarded moments and this proves that men are more equal than unequal. Eloquence, wit, scholarly achievements and ego3 usually bring conceit and these qualities are distributed in equal share among men. This equality of ability, according to him, brings the hope of attaining our ends. If more than one man desire the same thing, it has to result in a dispute and fight, because both cannot own the same thing and both are in danger of getting vanquished by the other as now they are sworn enemies4. After destroying the other, the survivor would defend himself for the rest of his life against another invader5 and afterward against many more invaders and in the process, either he would perish, or destroy all of them. It is like the ‘survival of the fittest’ in a jungle law. There are men who pursue a conquest beyond the necessity of their own security. Such a person has to chase this security point till he feels that all men who might endanger his authority are destroyed and hence, he is the most powerful6. From this point onwards, he would not create war like situation, as he is now the protector7, and not a defender or attacker. Hobbes argues that political and social stability establishes itself awed by this ultimate authority. EMOTIONAL SIDE OF IT: But man’s struggle for power does not end here. Now he needs the reputation he had been craving for. Fear of death is a thing of past now, and mental peace prevails. Man feels unhappy at every sign of devaluation, insult, and contempt by his fellow men from whom he expects high regard at which he holds himself and gets disappointed when it does not come to him automatically and this makes him unhappy in others’ company more than in his own. He is well satisfied and smug in his own company. He looks for signs of adulation around him. The quarrel among men does not end with a certain political stability. There are three main principal causes of quarrel among men: competition, diffidence, and glory. For competition, man invades another to acquire his possessions, wife, and children, (Hobbes seems to be comfortable with this9); for the second, for his own safety and for defending the newly acquired possessions, and for third, (this is emotional matter of heart, not of brain) tries to attain glory through trifles like a smile, a word or a well-meant praise or admiration. Man, who had been ruthless and harsh all along, shows his tender side by unveiling desires for art and sensitivity, and this could involve friends, family, profession or the nation. Pursuing his argument that political authority is a necessity, Hobbs argues that men live in peace by getting used to authority, the absence of which would keep them involved in war against every man. And in a war10, there is no society, no culture, no advancement of knowledge, but only ‘continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.’ Nature disassociates itself and allows men to destroy one another. Man, in his passion and inferior opinion of fellow-beings keeps his wealth locked. According to Hobbes, these actions of men are no sin as the absence of a final authority11 has brought out the animal quality of people dormant in them. Perpetual war-like situation12 is a bit rare and instead, kings wage war against each other to resolve jealousies and defend their possessions and independence. He prefers these kings, who through their forts, spies, guns and garrisons, keep a bristling war atmosphere alive because ordinary people are undisturbed by it and it is better than the ‘misery which accompanies the liberty of particular men.’ CONCLUSION: Thus, it is clear that common interest of fear leads men into political society and fear could be of gory death, insecurity, lack of cultural living, deprivation of comfort and industry, losing satisfaction derived out of life, losing kin and possessions, living with unfulfilled desires, separation, misadventure and hatred ruling every bit of life. Hobbes feels that even a bad political authority is better than none and should be welcomed and cherished13. It is also could lead to The Right of Nature (jus naturale), Liberty, Law of Nature (lex naturalis). People living in such societies are fortunate. These are rather incompatible with the absolute political authority that had been advocated by Hobbs as better than sheer anarchy. The atrocious times he lived in seem to have dictated much of his originality. It is peace and peace alone that Hobbs is after. The overwhelming civil war, leading to much of anarchy in remote regions had made Hobbs to realize the importance of political society with an authority to govern, protect and safeguard the rights of common citizens. Book Referred: Edwin Curley, ed., Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan with selected variants from the Latin edition of 1668, (Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company, Inc.), 1994. Read More