the foundation of political order in thomas hobbes · hobbes: leviathan, the lesser evil… “and...

The Foundation of Political Order in Thomas Hobbes

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

7-8th March 2019

Viriato Soromenho-Marques

(FLUL)

Table of Contents

1. Introduction to Modern Political philosophy. Basic concepts.

2. From Human Nature to the Leviathan in Hobbes.

www.viriatosoromenho-marques.com 2

Daniel J. Elazar (1934-1999)

ELAZAR, Daniel Judah,

COVENANT & COMMONWEALTH.

From Christian Separation through the Protestant Reformation. The Covenant Tradition in Politics.

Volume II


http://images.google.pt/imgres?imgurl=http://www.biu.ac.il/SOC/po/lainer/de.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.biu.ac.il/SOC/po/lainer/Daniel_Elazar_english.html&usg=__cPVBzoKSd3Ke1qgZd-ZrN8fFFiY=&h=71&w=69&sz=3&hl=pt-PT&start=2&um=1&itbs=1&tbnid=MHHhkCAdmcFpPM:&tbnh=69&tbnw=67&prev=/images%3Fq%3DDaniel%2BElazar%26um%3D1%26hl%3Dpt-PT%26sa%3DN%26tbs%3Disch:1

Covenant

a) Covenant: "A covenant differs from a compact in that its morally binding dimension takes precedence over its legal dimension. In its heart of hearts, a covenant is an agreement in which a higher moral force, traditionally God, is either a direct part to, or guarantor of, the particular relationship (2)"


Compact

a) A compact, based as it is on mutual pledges rather than guarantees by or before a higher authority, rests more heavily on a legal though still ethical grounding for its politics. (...) Compact was introduced in the mid eighteenth century as part of the spread of Enlightenment secular thought during the revolutionary era (idem)"


Contract

Contract: it’s a rather secular concept, without great moral glamour. It was Rousseau who made it popular in Europe and in the West (3).


The return of republicanism

"Perhaps the greatest political revolution of modernity was the republican revolution -- the restoration of the idea that the polity was a res publica, a commonwealth, the possession of its citizens, and not of some single individual or group who happened to rule it. The republican revolution was born out of the revolt against the divine right of kings..." (59).


Jean Bodin: translatio imperii and concessio imperii

Mais posons le cas [...] ou plusieurs des citoyens, ausquels on donne puissance absoluë de manier l'estat & gouverner entierement, sans deferer aux oppositions ou appellations en sorte quelconque, & que cela se face tous les ans, dirons nous pas que ceux là auront la souveraineté? Car celui est absolument souverain, qui ne recongnoist rien plus grand que soy apres Dieu. Je dy neantmoins que ceux là n'ont pas la souveraineté, attendu qu'ils ne sont rien que depositaires de la puissance qu'on leur a báillee à certain temps. Les six livres de la république [1576)]:Liv. I, cap. VIII, 124.


J. Althusius: Politics is the art of associating

“Politics is the art of associating (consociandi) men for the purpose of establishing, cultivating, and conserving social life among them. Whence it is called «symbiotics». The subject matter of politics is therefore association (consociatio), in which the symbiotes pledge themselves each to the other, by explicit or tacit agreement, to mutual communication of whatever is useful and necessary for the harmonious exercise of social life.” (Politica, 17).


About Althusius

• Joahnnes Althusius (1557-1638).

• Politica methodice digesta et exemplis sacris et profanis illustrata (1603; 1610 e 1614).

• Politica, translated by F. S. Carney, forword by Daniel J. Elazar, Indianapolis, Liberty Fund, 1995.

• Protofederalism with neoaristotelian background..


Diderot: Hobbes and Rousseau in white and black

La philosophie de M. Rousseau de Genève est presque l'inverse de celle de Hobbes. L'un croit l'homme de la nature bon, et l'autre le croit méchant. Selon le philosophe de Genève, l'état de nature est un état de paix; selon le philosophe de Malmebury, c'est un état de guerre. Ce sont les lois et la formation de la société qui ont rendu l'homme meilleur, si l'on croit Hobbes; et qui l'on dépravé, si l'on en croit M. Rousseau [...], Article "Hobbisme", Encyclopédie [1765]: tome VIII, 404.


Hobbes: Are Men evil by nature?

“But this, that men are evil by nature, follows not from this principle [that the dispositions of men are naturally such, that except they be restrained through fear of some coercive power, every man will distrust and dread each other-pp. XIV,XV]. For though the wicked were fewer than the righteous, yet because we cannot distinguish them there is a necessity of suspecting [...] Much less does it follow, that those who are wicked are so by nature [...]”. De Cive: XVI).


Hobbes: society, altruism, egoism

“All society therefore is either for gain, or for glory; that is, not so much for love of our fellows, as for the love of ourselves. De Cive: cap. I, §2, 5).


Hobbes: state of nature and international relations

“But though there had never been any time, wherein particular men were in a condition of warre one against another; yet in all times, Kings, and Persons of Soveraigne authority, because of their Independency, are in continuall jealousies, and in the state and posture of Gladiators[...]”,Leviathan: cap. XIII, 115)


Hobbes: Leviathan, the lesser evil…

“And though of so unlimited a power, men may fancy many evil consequences, yet the consequences of the want of it, which is perpetual war of every man against his neighbour, are much worse.” Leviathan: cap. XX, 195)


2 dimensions of the social contract in 1642

“This submission of the wills of all those men to the will of one man or one council, is then made, when each one of them obligeth himself by contract to every one of the rest, not to resist the will of that one man or council, to which he hath submitted himself.” De Cive: cap. V, §7, 68).


One contract, Two dimensions

The “compact of submission”, give birth to the “city”, to “Leviathan”, contains 2 dimensions:

Horizontal: Omni lateral. All individuals renounce to mutual violence.

Vertical: “People” becomes a “rude multitude”, transferring its power to the artificial sovereign (King or Council).


New formula for the contract in Leviathan (1651)

"I authorize and give up my right of governing myself, to this man, or to this assembly of men, on this condition, that thou give up thy right to him and authorize all his actions in like manner.", HOBBES, Leviathan, par. II, cap. XVII, p. 158.


Anthropological Grounding for the social contract

“For there is no such finis ultimus, utmost aim, nor summum bonum, greatest god, as is spoken of in the books of the old moral philosophers [...] Felicity is a continual progress of the desire, from one object to another; the attaining of the former, being still but the way to the later [...] So that in the first place, I put for a general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death. Leviathan: cap. XI, 85-86).


Hobbes: Passions and Quarrel

“So that in the nature of man, we find three principal causes of quarrel. First, Competition; Secondly, Diffidence; Thirdly, Glory. Leviathan: cap. XIII, 112).


The Right of Nature

“THE right of nature, which writers commonly call jus naturale, is the liberty each man hath to use his own power as he will himself for the preservation of his own nature; that is to say, of his own life; and consequently, of doing anything which, in his own judgement and reason, he shall conceive to be the aptest means thereunto.” (Lev., ch. XIV).


Liberty

“By liberty is understood, according to the proper signification of the word, the absence of external impediments; which impediments may oft take away part of a man's power to do what he would, but cannot hinder him from using the power left him according as his judgement and reason shall dictate to him.” (idem).


The law of nature

“A law of nature, lex naturalis, is a precept, or general rule, found out by reason, by which a man is forbidden to do that which is destructive of his life, or taketh away the means of preserving the same, and to omit that by which he thinketh it may be best preserved. “ (Lev. Ch. XIV)


Law differs from Right

“For though they that speak of this subject use to confound jus and lex, right and law, yet they ought to be distinguished, because right consisteth in liberty to do, or to forbear; whereas law determineth and bindeth to one of them: so that law and right differ as much as obligation and liberty, which in one and the same matter are inconsistent.” (idem).


State of nature versus civil state • State of nature Civil state • Primary Secondary

• Natural Artificial

• Right of Nature Law of Nature • Liberty Obligation • War Peace • Suspiction Contract

• Horizontal distributed violence Vertical Monopoly of violence


the foundation of political order in thomas hobbes · hobbes: leviathan, the lesser evil… “and...

Documents