Philosopher views
Hobbes Natural Philosophy Theory
Download 5.81 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Hobbes Moral Philosophy
- Leviathan and Other Political Writings
- Criticism of Hobbes Theories
Hobbes Natural Philosophy TheoryIn scientific reasoning, the essential question to be answered is usually “How do we know what we know?” In Hobbes’ theory of natural philosophy, this question is slightly altered. His fundamental question was “What do we know?” His answer was that we only know what is in our minds. Because of this limitation, people need more information than what is inside them to make determinations about reality and truth. In Hobbes’ view, people’s senses color or distort their understanding of objectiveness, thus presenting a kind of unreality about the world. Much of Hobbes’ writings on natural philosophy are found in his book De Corpore. Much of the work is devoted to methodology in philosophical work, rather than true opinions about philosophy. However, one issue that he does raise is the influence and purpose of language in natural philosophy. Because reality and truth lie in the minds of individuals, there are disputes about whose reality and truth is to be believed and used. Therefore, a system or arbiter was necessary to fairly settle disputes. Hobbes thought that language was an impartial tool that could be used to resolve such disputes. He believed it was the only tool humans had with which to reason and resolve conflicts together.5 Hobbes Moral PhilosophyBased on his theories of natural philosophy, Hobbes developed his moral philosophy. Just as there are no true facts outside the mind in natural philosophy, Hobbes believed that there were no facts in ethics. Thus, the only way for people to resolve disagreements were to uncover some principle or set of principles on which all would spontaneously agree as the basis for their moral judgments. The principle Hobbes suggested was that everyone would accept that each of us has the right to preserve ourselves and that no one can ever be blamed for doing what they must do in order to survive. Hobbes believed that each person’s fundamental right of nature is not simply to preserve themselves, but to use their own power as they will themselves, for the preservation of their own Nature. He emphasized the right of every person to make their own decision about how to create their own security. Critics of Hobbes label this theory irrational. A typical question of such critics is “How could the laws of nature allow people to protect themselves in any way they see fit while not breaking the laws of nature to achieve this goal?” Thus, according to his critics, the laws of nature limit one’s options for self-preservation and Hobbes’ theory is not absolute. Beyond survival, humans also strive for happiness, or pleasure. In Hobbes’ view it was good, i.e., moral to pursue what one believed would bring him or her pleasure. This reasoning made sense to Hobbes because just as true knowledge was found only in an individual’s mind, true happiness also found only within oneself. Given these suppositions, Hobbes believed that political (often referred to as civil) philosophy provided the best hope for resolving moral disputes. Politics provided the framework he described in his theory on moral philosophy, which arose from his theory on natural philosophy. Thus, all three elements are tied together as one system. Leviathan and Other Political WritingsLife for kings and other monarchs in seventeenth-century Europe was not kind. Revolutions and rebellions occurred in several kingdoms, including England and France. For people who supported strong monarchial governments—like Hobbes—such uprisings were extremely disconcerting. Hobbes believed whole-heartedly that only a strong sovereignty would save humanity. Thus, in response to the tremendous political upheaval caused by the various civil wars, Hobbes wrote Leviathan, a treatise which “stands for a sovereign power of the kind which is necessary to prevent rebellion and civil war.” 6 In this book he presented his ideas about the significance of a strong sovereignty. “Ideas” was a key word for Hobbes, for he believed that the political chaos of his day were caused by a crisis of ideas. The government Hobbes called for in Leviathan was consider unreligious by the Church of England and Hobbes was branded a heretic. Basically, he believed that all citizens should submit to one monarch as ruler of the people. That this monarch would be the authority to settle political and social disputes, that his rulings were the final word over all issues, even above God. Hobbes justified this authority by demonstrating how unappealing life would be without such an order. In Hobbes s System of Ideas, Watkins provides a concise list of Hobbes’ belief of what people would be like if a civil society provided by a strong sovereignty did not exist.7 In summary, it paints a gloomy picture of society as a group of people ill-equipped to cope with the natural elements and constantly struggling to avoid violent death. In other political writings produced by Hobbes he elaborated on his theories about free will, tights, and liberty. For example in the Elements of Law, he discussed the natural tights of man and justification for defending them. However, in almost all of his books that address political issues—such as De Cive and the Critique of Thomas White—Hobbes always presented his essential argument which was that individuals have the right to protect themselves against attack by others. Criticism of Hobbes TheoriesEven before Leviathan was published, it generated harsh criticism and rebuke, mainly for its lack of support for the Church of England. Since then much of Hobbes’ writings have been analyzed and criticized. Watkins accuses Hobbes of not fully elaborating on the viability of the sovereign remedy for government Instead, according to Watkins, Hobbes gives a “blanket assurance” that however bad things might turn out under monarchy, they are far better than the consequences of full scale civil war.8 Watkins further indicts the Hobbsian concept of gaining freedom by submitting to a sovereign. If the freedoms granted under such a system are only less miserable—not necessarily more desirable—than liberties under a non-sovereign government, the results are still not pleasurable for people.9 W.H. Greenleaf summarizes several critics of Hobbes. According to Greenleaf, it would be difficult for Hobbes to defend the linear, or systematic, model of his theories. The mechanics required for the outcomes described in moral philosophy do not logically stem from Hobbes’ explanations of natural philosophy, for example. Additionally, there are other instances when the theories do not logically flow together and other inconsistencies are found when the different areas of philosophy are examined together.10 Conclusion Although there exists considerably more criticism of Hobbes’ work than there actually is of his work, his contribution to the discipline of philosophy cannot be dismissed. It is perhaps because of the abundance of criticism that one can justify Hobbes’s place among the elite philosophers of seventeenth-century Europe. His essays on political philosophy alone make he a contributor of invaluable measure to discussions on the nature and purpose governments. Finally, because he was the first great philosopher to publish m English, Hobbes should be essential reading for anyone interested in learning more about modern political philosophy. Directory: uploads uploads -> 587 Return function, r i(X) r i(0) r i(1) r i(2) r i(3) 1 0 2 4 6 Thermal Station, I 2 0 1 5 6 3 0 3 5 6 10 uploads -> Department of science and humanities department of mathematics part-a questions and answers uploads -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? uploads -> For want of a nail uploads -> Ownership Models There are two different types of ownership models uploads -> Police Militarization uploads -> City of rising star regular meting thursday, july 14, 2016 uploads -> Township of winfield uploads -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 uploads -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program What We Want Now! Download 5.81 Mb. Share with your friends:
|