|
Sophia on the web A Resource Guide for Philosophy Students Created by Jennifer Leslie Torgerson, MA This
page last modified: September 13, 2015 ©
copyright, 1997 - present http://philosophyhippo.net
Thomas Hobbes 1588 – 1679
CE Bibliography Baird
and Kaufmann. Philosophical Classics: From
Plato to Nietzsche, 2nd Edition. (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1997 [1994]). Huntington
Cairns. Legal Philosophy from Plato to Hegel. (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1967
[1949]). Frederick
Copleston, A
History of Philosophy: Book Two. (New York, NY: Doubleday, 1985 [1944]). Martin
Curd and J.A. Cover. Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues. (New York: NY: W.W. Norton & Company, 1998). David
Grene. The Peloponnesian War Thucydides; The
Complete Hobbes Translation. (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1989 [1959]). W.
T. Jones. A History of Western Philosophy:
Hobbes to Hume, 2nd Edition. (San Diego, CA: Harcourt Brace, 1980 [1952]). Daniel
Kolak. The Mayfield Anthology of Western
Philosophy. (Mountain View,
CA: Mayfield Publishing, 1998). Louis
P. Pojman. Classics of Philosophy. (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1998). Thomas
Hobbes. Leviathan. (New York,
NY: Collier Books, 1962). T.
V. Smith and Marjorie Grene. Philosophers
Speak for Themselves: From Descartes
to Locke. (Chicago, IL: University
of Chicago Press, 1967 [1940]). Robert C. Solomon. Introducing
Philosophy: A Text with Integrated
Readings, 9th Edition.
(Oxford, UK: Oxford University
Press, 2008). William
O. Stephens. The Person: Readings in Human
Nature. (Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall, 2006). Avrum Stroll and Richard H. Popkin. Philosophy
and the Human Spirit: A Brief
Introduction. (New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1973). The principle works of Hobbes
Thomas Hobbes and mechanism Thomas Hobbes (1588 -1679),
an English philosopher, went further to popularize mechanistic materialism in
his writings, including Leviathan. Hobbes explained conscious life as
sensations that are movements in the brain and nervous system. This view was
further enhanced by Newton and his laws of motion and his study of mechanics
in general. By the twentieth century various biologists, psychologists, and
physiologists were employing mechanistic interpretations of all living
things, including man. All movements, from those of distant stars to those of
man, can be explained without any appeal to nonphysical principles.
According to mechanistic materialism, mind and its activities are forms
of behavior. Materialism takes many forms: from ancient materialistic atomism
to the metaphysical behaviorialism and physical
realism of modern times. Newton and his laws of motion & man as a machine (1) A body at rest will
remain at rest or in motion with a constant velocity unless acted upon by an
outside force. (2) The sum of the
forces acting on a body is equal to the product of it mass and acceleration
(F = ma). (3) For every action
there is an equal and opposite reaction. Man is no more than a
material machine or mechanism; just as everything else in the
universe is due to mechanistic causes, so is the existence of man. Mind
is a brain, and a brain is a physical body. It would seem that all things
are predetermined in the old mechanism. Einstein, Relativity, Quantum Mechanics and the New
Mechanism But all things are not predetermined
in the new mechanism. Due to uncertainty (Heisenberg's Uncertainty
Principle ~ cannot know the velocity and location of an electron with
certainty at the same time) some events are seen as uncaused. Einstein also eliminated the
view that time-space was absolute. The fabric of time-space is curved. E = mc2 Planck came up with the idea
of quantum. He assumed that energy is radiated in packages, or quanta,
where each quantum has energy directly proportional to the frequency of the
radiation. This nonclassical assumption
predicts a spectrum (of light, etc.) that does not agree with nature.
Based on quantum theory, Bohr came up with a new spectrum for the
hydrogen atom, showing the orbits of excited electrons. Matter has been
'dematerialized'. How do particles
acquire mass? Learn more about the
“God particle” or the Higgs Boson field. Criticisms of mechanism The critics of mechanism
would claim that mechanistic materialism commits the reduction fallacy. This
is a fallacy which occurs when some complex situation or whole is described
as "nothing but" some kind of element or simple part. For example. when the materialist asserts that mind is merely a form of
matter, the critic claims that he is guilty of a crude reductionism. The reductionist
reduces all phenomena to one type and thereby denies or at least blurs useful
distinctions (such as mind from body). Other critiques of
materialism: (1) There are no observable nor analytical methods establishing materialism as true with
certainty. (2) Materialism cannot
account for the nature of thought because materialism states that the nature
of a thing is entirely derived from the substance from which it is made i.e.
the matter. The essence of thought is wholly outside of itself because thought
are about things and are not reducible or identical to that thing. A material
thing cannot have "aboutness." "Aboutness"
is only in the thought about the material object. Determinism There are two types of
determinism: hard and soft. Soft determinism is generally
called indeterminism. Indeterminism is the theory that some events do not
have causes. For example, the human will is considered to be
undetermined, or free to make choices. This is also called free
volition or free will. Hence, in an
universe of deterministic causes, the human will is still uncaused. Hard determinism is the view
that: (a) every event has a natural cause [this is sometimes called scientific
determinism]; (b) is completely determined by fate [from Latin fatum: oracle- from the gods]; or (c) is
predestined [by God]. Hard determinism is also called strict
determinism. Critiques of strict determinism: (1) A human being is more
than a determined process. Consider creativity. (2) Does scientific
determinism take into account the process we go through when we make careful,
deliberate, free choices? Hobbes’ view of the state of nature, the social
contract, and the Leviathan State of Nature: The
condition of humanity without (or before) government. Its hypothetical
description ranges from Hobbes’ portrayal of anarchy with brutal and
continual war of “all against all” to Rousseau’s concept of the “noble
savage” living in a condition of moral purity, happiness, and health Hobbes’ Social Contract
theory: Natural existence without a social contract means a state of war of
one against all and all against all; no one would have property, rights, or
claims. One must submit oneself to a contract for self-preservation and
protection (guaranteed by a being or other source of military and legal
power, to which allegiance and financial support is given). Religion, Superstition, and
True Religion (L, ch.6) religion: “Fear of power invisible, feigned by the
mind, or imagined from false tales publicly allowed.” superstition: Fear of power invisible, feigned by the
mind, or imagined from false tales publicly NOT allowed. true religion: “[...] And when the power
imagined, is truly as we imagine.” Law of NATURE [L. ch. 14]: “A LAW OF NATURE, lex naturalis, is a precept or general rule, found out through
reason, by which a man is forbidden to do that, which is destructive to his
life, or taketh away the means to preserving the
same; and to omit that, by which he thinketh that
it may be best preserved.” (jus= right, lex=law). [L. ch.
26.] “[...]THE LAW OF NATURE WHICH IS UNDOUBTEDLY
GOD’S LAW.” [L. ch.
26] “Besides, there is no place in the world where men are permitted to
pretend other commandments of God, than are declared for such by the
commonwealth. Christian states punish those who revolt from the Christian
religion, and all other states, those that set up any religion by them
forbidden. For in whatsoever is not regulated by the commonwealth, it is
equity, which is the law of nature, and therefore the eternal law of God,
that every man equally enjoys his liberty.” There are 19 laws of nature
[L. ch. 14 +15]: (1) “Naturally every man has
a right to everything. The fundamental law of nature.” (2) “From this fundamental
law of nature, by which men are commanded to endeavor peace is derived from
this second law; that a man be willing, when others are so too, as far-forth,
as for peace, and defence of himself he shall think
it necessary, to lay down this right to all things, and be contented with so
much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himself.”
[L. ch
26] “Do not that to another, which thou thinkest
unreasonable to be done by another to thyself.” contract: [L. ch. 14] “The
mutual transferring of right, is that which men call contract.” pact or covenant: [L. ch. 14] “One of the contractors may deliver the thing
contracted for on his part, and leave the other to perform his part at some
determinate time after, and then the contract on his part, is called a pact
or covenant : or both parts may contract now, to perform hereafter: in which
cases, he that is to perform in time to come, being trusted, his performance
is called keeping of promise, or faith, and the failing of performance, if it
be voluntary, violation of faith.” GOD: [L. ch.
2] “But evil men under the pretext that God can do any
thing, are so bold as to say any thing when
it serves their turn, though they think it untrue; it is the part of a wise
man, to believe them no farther, than right of reason makes that which they
say, appear credible. If this superstitious fear of spirits were taken away,
and with it, prognostics from dreams, false prophecies, and so many other
things depending thereon, by which crafty ambitious persons abuse the simple
person, men would be much more fitted than they are for civil obedience.” [L. ch
15] “He (the fool) does not therein deny, that there be covenants; and that
they are sometimes broken, sometimes kept; and that such breach of them may
be called injustice, and the observance of them justice: but he questioneth, whether injustice, taking away the fear of Hobbes’ view of the state of
nature, the social contract and the Leviathan: PAGE 2 God, for the same fool hath
said in his heart that there is no God, and may not sometimes stand with that
reason, which dictateth to every man his own good;
and particularly then, when it conduceth to such a
benefit, as shall put a man in a condition, to neglect not only the
dispraise, and revilings, but also the power of
other men. The Kingdom of God is gotten by violence: but what if it could be
gotten by unjust violence? were it against reason so
to get it, when it is impossible to receive hurt by it? and
if it not against reason, it is not against justice: or else justice is not
to be approved for good. From such reasoning as this, successful wickedness
hath obtained the name virtue: and some that in all other things have
disallowed the violation of faith; yet we have allowed it, when it is for the
getting of a kingdom.” commonwealth: [L. ch. 17] “[...] made by covenant of every man with every
man, I authorize and give up my right of governing myself, to this man, or
assembly of men, on this assembly of men, on this condition, that thou give
up thy right to him and authorize all his actions in like manner. This done,
the multitude so united in one person, is called a COMMONWEALTH, in Latin
CIVITAS.” Leviathan: [L. ch 17] “This is the generation of the great LEVIATHAN, or
rather, to speak more reverently, of that mortal god, to which we owe under
the authority of the immortal God, our peace and defence.
For by this authority, given by him, that by terror thereof, he is enabled to
form the wills of them all, to peace at home, and mutual aid against their
enemies abroad.” Civil Law: [L. ch. 26] “The ancient law of Rome was called civil law,
from the word civitas, which signifies a
commonwealth: and those countries, which having been under the Roman empire,
and governed by that law, retain still such part thereof as they think fit,
call that part the civil law, to distinguish it from the rest of their own
civil laws. [...] This is not what I intend to speak of here. [...] CIVIL LAW, is, to every subject, those rules, which the
commonwealth hath commanded him, by word, writing, or other sufficient sign
of will, to make use of, for the distinction of right and wrong; that is to
say what is contrary, and what is not contrary to the rule.” Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan,
(New York: Macmillian Publishing Company, 1962). |
