How Far Does Hobbes Views of Human Nature Provide a Secure Basis for Psychology Today - Coursework Example

How far does Hobbes Views of Human Nature Provide a Secure Basis for Psychology Today? Thomas Hobbes was an open, blunt and outspoken British Royalist. He wrote several essays on human nature. Most of his works discussed the nature of man’s relation to the state. In 1651 he published “The Leviathan”, which is considered by many as his magnum opus. Though the work is primarily a political treatise, his treatment of politics is of abiding interest to psychology. His book shows a tendency to rationalize human conduct. As a confirmed royalist, his purpose was none other than to justify the absolute power of the ruler. In order to understand his work it is good to have an idea of the turbulent times in which he lived. The civil war in England and the execution of the King himself was an exceptional event in English history. The failed puritan experiment to establish a republican rule was another event that Hobbes witnessed. He seems to have been deeply influenced by the conflicts around him. Many of his reactions in his writings spring from subjective reaction to the external events, which made him crave for order in a state of flux. The civil societies are to be constructed artificially, living the social life in the hands of man’s basic instinct will result in disorder and would imperil the very survival of man. What ought to be the politically correct human conduct is explained by Hobbes by analyzing human nature. According to him there is a natural impulse in all men to amass what they can get. This impulse found in all men inevitably leads to conflict. In this state every one is at war with every one else and nobody’s safety is possible. This results in not satisfying any body’s interests. Man is able to circumvent this situation by giving up the natural right take whatever they can grab and be getting in return for the assurance of insulation from the aggression of their fellow men. This is possible by perpetuating a strong force. Citizens do this by agreeing to hand over their rights and powers to one absolute authority. This voluntary surrender of ones powers in the hand of another power results in the rule by an absolute power. In brief the basic instincts in man meant for his survival can be in conflict with his survival so Hobbes finds the need for regulating it by surrendering the power of people to another superior power. As James has put it:“Hobbes grounds his account of this aspect of our passions on a broader notion which he calls power, identifying the powers of the body as nutritive, generative, and motive, and that of the mind as knowledge. Beyond these, however, are further powers that accrue to people who possess riches, places of authority, friendship or favor, and good fortune, all of which play a vital part in our quest for self-preservation.” (James, 1997, p. 132) From the angle of Psychology a cardinal aspect of Hobbes’s idea is the importance he gives to the “rational Man”. This is an assertion that human behavior is governed by reason. It is evident that man follows reason through fear and self-interest. Hobbes illustrates the common tendency to consider man as a reasoning animal and there fore the actions are planned and foreseen rather than decided by fate or chance. Hobbes takes his interest in human nature as a product of reason to higher planes by comparing not only the thought process of man when he is awake but also when he is asleep and dreaming. This process has been adequately analyzed by Tuck (1989). Some of the insights of Hobbes as studied by Tuck appear to be surprisingly modern. As Hobbes said in the “The Elements of Law”: “it is not impossible for a man to be so far deceived, as when his dream is past, to think it real: for if he dream of such things as are ordinarily in his mind, and in such order as he useth to do waking, and withal that he laid him down to set up in the place where he findeth himself when he awaketh”. Hobbes argues that our thoughts during asleep are also produced in the same way they are produced when we are awake. However there is a distinction between our sober thoughts and that we think in a state of sleep. The central argument of Hobbes in his discussion of human psychology is between our ordered train of thoughts and the disordered train of thoughts. Disordered thoughts in a normal man he believed is like the thought process of a mentally disturbed person. Dreams he thought are similar to such a state of mind. While thoughts in a state of wakefulness is conscious and have perceivable sequencing of ideas. Many Psychological theorists fall in the pitfall of assuming that the subjects that they come across are the models for human nature. Sigmund Freud’s study of human nature is marred by the fact that the characters that he studied were mostly pathological human specimens. In the case of Hobbes he makes the fallacy of drawing his conclusions of human nature by assumptions based on contemporary thinking on issues. Critics of Hobbes have noticed that he derives his idea of man, observing the prevalent ideas in then contemporary society. In spite of this draw back it can still be found that his contribution to Psychology is valuable. His discussion of psychological process in the milieu of natural events is in itself as asset to man’s understanding of Man. In this he stands on the shoulder of Galileo. Borrowing the ideas of motion from Galileo, he explains human psychology in terms of motion. According to him sensation is motion communicated by outward objects to the brain. This idea motion, as shown by Sorell was very much in vogue in the then society. He finds also in the thinking of Gassendi a contemporary of Hobbes:” These points suggest that Gassendi was a mechanistic materialist of some kind, and they link him in intellectual history with Hobbes, who proposed that physical as well as psychological phenomena were nothing more than motions in different kinds of body.” (Sorell, 1993, p. 235) Sequences of thoughts are matters of natural law for him. In the realm of thought one idea falls after another by a process of associationism. This is the result of natural law not by chance. His psychology is materialistic and mechanistic. Even the most casual imaginings of man take their place in an orderly stream of events. In spite of all these assertions there is a pervading insistence in his psychology that man by nature is selfish and his nature has to be improved by surrendering to a higher principle of regulated living. While he argues that man is essentially selfish, as Jessop observed: Hobbes egoistic view of human nature is not the argued conclusion but the initial postulate of his psychology. " (Jessop 20) One of the factors that is ignored in studying the psychology of Hobbes is the influence of theology on the system of his thought. His thinking is largely due to the fact that many consider him to antagonistic with the church. Though he was a great admirer of Galileo and regretted the trial of the great man by the ecclesiastical court of the times, he identified himself with the church and was deeply influenced by the theological and Biblical traditions of the times. But he had many muddle headed ideas on theological matters, which he asserted quiet casually. As Mintz has put it: “In his theology Hobbes reveals the same mixture of heterodox opinions couched in the language of orthodoxy. He does not deny the existence of God and angels, but declares them to be corporeal. " (Mintz, 1970, p. 35) Similarly, Hobbes took his view of human nature from the ideas of Christian pride, which has a theological foundation. His dependents on religion made him like a popular theologian. So according to him the sin pride comes from a deep –seated desire to rule others. The idea of pride is similar to the idea of power and calls it:”…a perpetual and restless desire for power after power, that ceaseth only in Death”. This relentless pursuit of power agreed with the ideas of other theologians. The Leviathan is a forceful presentation of the core idea of Christian pride, which is part of the post lapserian human nature, which makes him incapable of being truly a social being. Hobbe’s psychological theories were example of application to human conduct the cardinal principles of scientific enquiry. Hobbes in this matter stands in relation to his times, as does Freud in relation to our times. The schools of thought in Padua shaped the scientific approach of the 17th century. Galilea was perhaps the most visible of that tradition of scientific theory. Galileo’s approach was a revolutionary break from tradition. In the days of Hobbes the church’s authority in matters of secular knowledge was sacrosanct Scholars refused to deviate from the traditions of Aristotle and Scriptural authority. It is in that era that Hobbes tried to enquire the behavior of. Human mind. Though Hobbes first premises are often assertions, there was an attempt to take enquiry into the basics breaking down factors of existence into the lowest divisible elements. Freud also did the same when he studied the human mind. Freud’s theories are some times discredited by subsequent generation of scholars but he laid the foundation for the edifice of the modern psychology. While Freud discovered the foundation of human conduct on a principle of pleasure centered on gratification of libido, Hobbes theory was a theory of prudence in a world where all individuals are craving for satisfaction. Hobbes theory of prudence is of great value to the moralist and social scientists. According to Tuck (1989), however, Hobbes was not actually interested in explaining human conduct, but wanted to regulate human conduct for healthy living in a society. According to Hobbes in a primordial state of nature man is concerned about his rights .In Hobbes thinking there had never been an ideal garden of Eden for human beings only a state of nature. The Rousseauian vision of ‘the noble savage living in harmony with his fellowmen and the environment is perhaps one extreme vision of human nature. The Hobbesian view of human nature is not a romanticized view of man; it is a view of man, which sees him as brutish, competing with one another and hence in need of agreed upon contracts and policeman enforcing laws and violators send to gallows or prisons. Thus Hobbes view man is closer to Freudian picture of man full of atavistic tendencies hidden in the id. While, Freud saw the possibilities for man to achieve a balance in the conduct by the expression of libido or by the sublimation of cravings in healthy expression, Hobbes gave the prescription of willing surrender to an Absolute Sovereign power. When we analyze the conduct of modern societies the Hobbes view can be seen in actual practice. All societies ultimately depend on agreed contracts. Some of them are written others are traditions. If all are willing to follow these contracts society goes on smoothly. But when men do not follow these contracts what ensues is a state of war according to Hobbes. One of the fallacies judging the theories of thinker is to judge him by yardsticks different from that of his social milieu. The idea of absolute power was one the necessities of Hobbe’s times. In an evolving society the absolute power of the monarch is now handled by people themselves and in modern democratic societies, what was prerogative of the Kings and Queens are largely replaced by mutually agreed constitutions and elected representatives who are the guardians of the rights of people. Hobbes views are modern from a psychological point of view, even in the postmodern world by the insistence on the need for a central authority of power and the desirability of mutually agreed restrictions of the pursuits after power for the common good for all. =============== Works cited. James Susan. Passion and Action: The Emotions in Seventeenth-Century Philosophy. Clarendon Press. Oxford, England. 1997. Page Number: 132. The Elements of Law, Natural and Politic, ed. Ferdinand Toennies, 2nd edn by M. M. Goldsmith (London, 1969). Jessop T.E..Thomas Hobbes. Contributors: Longmans. London. 1960. Page Number: 20. Mintz Samuel.The Hunting of Leviathan: Seventeenth-Century Reactions to the Materialism and Moral Philosophy of Thomas Hobbes. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, England. 1970. Page Number: 35 Sorell, Tom, Hobbes (London, 1986). Tuck Richard. Oxford University Press. Oxford. 1989. 109. Read More