For Hobbes, ‘natural law’ is a concept derived from reason whereby humans bind themselves to certain rules in order to obtain peace with one another (Hobbes, 2008, p.98). Resting his argument on the premise that humans are naturally self-interested, he describes at length what society (or lack of it) would be like in a ‘state of nature’ where self-interest, uncurbed by natural and civil law, would descend into a war of all against all (Hobbes, 2008, p.94). Only the absolute power of a sovereign can coerce humans into civility, and only then can peace and unity be maintained.
According to Hobbes, it is a fundamental law of nature that humans naturally have a right to everything (Hobbes, 2008, p.97). In addition, humans have an insatiable desire for things (such as power) that persists for as long as we are alive (Hobbes, 2008, p.73) leading to contention for power and resources. Because every human cannot have everything, humans are naturally inclined towards competition for power and resources, and fall into conflict with one another over who gets what (Hobbes, 2008, pp.74, 93). This is what Hobbes describes as the war of all against all (Hobbes, 2008, p.94), and his conclusion is that as long as humans hold the right to everything, this war will always persist (Hobbes, 2008, p.98). The state of war is the state of nature; a state where humans are so concerned by personal safety that they are unable to cooperate for fear of one another, and unable to flourish in human endeavour because their efforts are singly focussed on obtaining and maintaining whatever they can get from others. There is no “mine or thine” or justice and injustice in this state, merely a free-for-all where everyone battles to keep what they have, and to obtain what others possess (Hobbes, 2008, p.96).
It is derived from this incessant fear and desire to possess things that Hobbes believes humans become inclined towards peace (Hobbes, 2008, p.96). He thinks it is a natural law (a human restriction derived from reason) that humans are unable to do anything that would threaten their own lives (Hobbes, 2008, p.97), and from this establishes a series of specific laws that humans are inclined towards by virtue of their own reason. The first of these laws states that humans should endeavour towards peace for as long as it is a realistic target, and resort to war only when peace becomes unobtainable (Hobbes, 2008, p.98). It is self-evident that this law complements the rule that humans are unable to do anything threatening to their own lives; if humans seek peace then they are seeking their own safety, if peace is ineffective then humans should resort to war to preserve their own safety.
The second law says that in seeking peace, humans should mutually relinquish their right to everything, and be happy an equal liberty towards one another (Hobbes, 2008, p.98). This rule clearly manifests to remove the source of conflict between humans (i.e. the right to everything), but in what appears to be related to the Golden Rule (do not do to others, what you wouldn’t have done to yourself) (Hobbes, 2008, p.118) Hobbes goes on to say that all men must relinquish this right at the same time, because whatever you want others to do to you, you must also do to them. His reasoning is that if person-A were to give up their right to everything, but person-B was not, person-B would merely exploit person-A’s position and take everything from them. Person-A would become person-B’s prey (Hobbes, 2008, p.98), and the question then arises; why would person-B lay down his right if he knows that person-A is going to lay down his right, and person-B could just go and take everything for himself?
There needs to be a force, Hobbes tells us, which will coerce everyone at the same time into laying down their right to all things. He sees this as a covenant between humans, which according to his third law humans will uphold in the name of peace (for if they didn’t then war would persist), but requires an outside body to enforce (Hobbes, 2008, p.108). In Hobbes view, the only way forward is to give all coercive power to one person (or an assembly) and to reduce the multiplicity of individual wills into one all powerful will (Hobbes, 2008, p.131). This will, the sovereign, wields the terror of punishment amongst his subjects to enforce peace domestically and unity in foreign battle (Hobbes, 2008, p.132). The sovereign is, by consent of the people (Hobbes, 2008, p.134), the sole decider of what constitutes good, evil, wrong, right, justice, and injustice (Hobbes, 2008, p.252), and maintains this right for as long as he can still protect his subjects (Hobbes, 2008, p.171).
Hobbes believed reason was the pathway to civility. Humans could not and would not live in harmony if left unrestricted, so reason subsequently leads us to trade our natural rights for natural laws which work towards a common good. To achieve the civil state humans must submit everything to the supreme power of a sovereign, and only then, under that power, can the war of all against all become the peace of all towards all.
References/Bibliography
- Hobbes, T 2008, ‘Leviathan’, eds. M Oakeshott, Touchstone, New York, pp.73-79, 92-120, 129-173, 250-260.
No comments:
Post a Comment