Authority and the Problem of Political Philosophy

Hobbes Studies, 2022

This article identifies an argument in Hobbes’s writings often overlooked but relevant to current philosophical debates. Political philosophers tend to categorize his thought as representing consent or rescue theories of political authority. Though these interpretations have textual support and are understandable, they leave out one of his most compelling arguments—what we call the lesser evil argument for political authority, expressed most explicitly in Chapter 20 of Leviathan. Hobbes frankly admits the state’s evils but appeals to the significant disparity between those evils and the greater evils outside the state as a basis for political authority. More than a passing observation, aspects of the lesser evil argument appear in each of his three major political works. In addition to outlining this argument, the article examines its significance both for Hobbes scholarship and recent philosophical debates on political authority.

UCAC, 2024

The History of Philosophy is characterized by the search for philosophical solutions to the problems that confront humanity. One of such problems is the question of sovereignty which constitutes the bedrock of present-day discourse in political philosophy. Political philosophy begins with the question: what ought to be a person’s relationship to society? The discussion of sovereignty is indispensable inasmuch as there are a people who ought to be governed. This is because human beings, as “political animals”, are surrounded by a political arena needing leadership as they inter-relate with one another. Consequently, the question of sovereignty is always very sensitive in the discussion of politics. But it is often confused by liberalists with selfishness and identified with exploitation. More often than not, the essence of sovereignty is questioned and efforts are most of the time geared toward minimizing its power in the society. In effect, Thomas Hobbes understands sovereignty and invites all to reflect on it. He wants us to think straight of the absolute sovereign as the restorer and preserver of peace. The concept of absolute sovereignty is the core of Hobbes’ political philosophy. Part 1 of Leviathan, which culminates in the discussion of the state of nature, is intended to establish the necessity of Hobbes’ theory of sovereignty, its nature and its justification. According to him, only a sovereign with absolute power can liberate individuals from the violence posed by the state of nature and to protect them from returning to it. As such, the alternative to this state of nature is, for Hobbes, the absolute sovereign whom he personifies as the “Leviathan.” He considers absolute sovereignty as the best political system in which peace, Hobbes’ overriding concern, could be best preserved. The peace Hobbes seeks is for the good of the people who are the objective of government action. Before continuing to prescribe the methodological framework of this dissertation, it will be important to clearly state its main objective. Our objective is to investigate whether there will be an ardent respect of God and for human dignity in a political system that practices absolute sovereignty as Hobbes portrays. This leads us to ask salient questions that the work seeks to answer following Hobbes’ political insight. To this end, the overriding question of focus is: what is the place of God and human dignity in a commonwealth that practices absolute sovereignty? Related to this are other minor questions that will be answered in the course of this work. They include: what is absolute sovereignty according to Hobbes and how should it run the state? What are the foundations that make sovereignty necessarily absolute? What type of state existed before an absolute sovereign state? And what relevance has Hobbes’ theory of absolute sovereignty to our present day society? Keywords: Sovereignty, Power, Common Good, Good Governance, Human Right and Freedom.

History of Political Thought, 2019

After abandoning the approach taken in The Elements of Law, Hobbes used De Cive to establish his new civil science on a materialist basis, thus challenging the dualist foundations of Descartes’s mechanical philosophy. This shift is analysed here with close reference to the discontinuity in Hobbes’s use of the concepts of ‘laws of nature’ and ‘right reason’. The article argues that, the descriptive nature of mechanics notwithstanding, De Cive’s foundational aim left civil science with the normative task of producing its own material conditions of possibility until, in Leviathan, Hobbes went as far as reconsidering Plato’s philosophical commitment to political pedagogy.

The Review of Politics , 2021

Hobbes's preference for monarchical sovereign forms and his critique of democratic political organization are well-known. In this article I suggest that his opposition to democratic life, however, constitutes a central frame through which we must understand the most important theoretical mutations that occur throughout the various stages of his civil science. Key alterations in the Hobbesian political philosophy from The Elements of Law to Leviathan can be interpreted as efforts to retroactively foreclose the emergence of a substantive democratic normativity that the prior theoretical framework allowed for or suggested. Hobbes's opposition to democracy is ultimately so significant so as to fundamentally structure core elements of his political philosophy, the form of political obligation shifting in response to the perception of democratic potentiality.

This article explores the concept and function of power in the philosophy and politics of Thomas Hobbes and the ways in which he has subsequently been read and used. We look at how fear of violent death structures the contract model and how Hobbes mobilizes a spectacle of fear, a 'lesson of fear', to legitimate his system and convince his readers and we discuss his political psychology and the anthropological foundation of his thinking situating man as the eminently dangerous and killable being. Man is basically exposed and vulnerable and this is both the foundation and the selling point of his system. We then move onto his nominalism and the right of interpretation and naming as the premier attribute of sovereignty. It is a monopoly on decision and interpretation rather than violence which preoccupies Hobbes and defines his sovereign. Just like the fragility of flesh is used creatively so is religion both the problem and the solution. Hobbes develops a political theology using a minimalist and politicized definition of religion to block the attempts of religious scholars and proselytes to use religion against the sovereign but he also acknowledges the power of religion to persuade and legitimate so he inscribes the sovereign, the Leviathan, the mortal God, within a religious vocabulary and mysticism. Deep within his mechanistic philosophy a mystic religious core pulses. Hobbes' solution throughout is to turn the problem and source of disorder into the solution and foundation of order. This article explores how he did that.

Open Journal of Philosophy, 2015

The purpose of the state and its apparatus right from the formation of human society to this contemporary period is still being confronted with the question of legitimacy. One of the major reasons why the state is formed is for the attainment of good life of the citizens. The institution of the state would thus remain legitimate only when those who are in political authority perform basic functions of government to meet the expectations of the members of the society. To this end, this paper examines the concept of consent and consensus as a foundation for the justification of the emergence of the state and argue that if there is no mutual agreement within the society, there can be little or no way of ensuring peaceful resolution of policy differences that is associated with the democratic process. Consequent upon this, the paper adopts Thomas Hobbes social contract theory as a theoretical framework to explain the origin of the state and justify the absolute power of the government which is rooted in the consent and the consensus of the people. The philosophical methods of conceptual clarification and critical analysis are employed to examine Hobbes political theory and evaluate its relevance to the contemporary society.

Forum Philosophicum, 2010

Thomas Hobbes bequeathed to us a comprehensive system, the interpretation of which remains a matter of disagreement even today. In his political theory, he pays most attention to the state community. He deliberates over the reasons for its origin, its decline and fall. Among the more detailed issues dealt with in his reflections, the more important ones are the following: the concept of the state of nature, human motivation, the state of war and peace, as well as considerations concerning the social contract. In order to be consistent in his argument, Hobbes also deals with the analysis of the structures of the state, the division of power and with the functions a state should perform. Due to these deliberations, he finally arrives at the secret of the state's durability. Though it is certainly the case that, since his times, the socio-political situation and circumstances have changed, many of the solutions postulated by Hobbes have not lost their value.

2015

This paper would revisit Hobbes and Locke's work, namely Leviathan and The Essay Concerning Human Understanding so as to reconnect the work of the two philosophers to the present reading of politics and philosophy. The paper discusses Hobbes and Locke's importance in laying the foundations for the field of political science and acknowledges their role for incorporating human reason and understanding in their seminal works. And in the age of 21 st century of modern politics where strife and dissent are commonplace in the era of technology and interconnectivity, perhaps it is timely that Hobbes and Locke's fundamental philosophies are re-emphasized for their core focus on humanity and reasoning in the perspective of the sovereign state and the individual.