![[Thomas Hobbes]](3d06692f.jpg "Thomas HObbes")
The reading this week is part 2 of
Leviathan. Here, Hobbes takes us from the state of nature into the commonwealth or state. He starts by asking how commonwealths arise, and by defining a number of key terms including sovereign and subject (chapter 17). In chapter 18 he discusses the rights of sovereigns in those commonwealths that arise "by institution" - that is to say, ones which have been set up by the agreement of their members (as opposed to ones which develop from families or start by conquest). The gist of Hobbes' message is that such sovereigns have absolute power, and that subjects can never justly oppose or criticize them. Contrast what Hobbes says about property here (and elsewhere) with the views on the same topic of that earlier absolutist,
Jean Bodin. Why did the two thinkers differ on this question? Is the difference to be explained in terms of their historical contexts, or is it primarily linked to more general divergences between their theories. What were these divergences? How does Hobbes' theory of sovereignty compare with Bodin's? Hobbes says that once the majority of the people who first instated the commonwealth has named a sovereign, everyone else must also obey him; but why should they not act as free riders, obeying only when it is in their selfish interests to do so? Reread the section on the Fool from chapter 15 (in last week's reading) for more information on how Hobbes handles the problem of free riders. Is his case convincing?
Other key questions about Hobbes' views on the state include: what do you think of Hobbes' arguments for monarchy (chapter 19)?; he denies that there is any real difference between tyranny and monarchy (chapter 19) - how would you attack and defend this position? do sovereigns by conquest and right of fatherhood differ from each other, or from sovereigns by institution (chapter 20)?; what is original and / or provocative about Hobbes' account of liberty (chapter 21)?. In chapter 26, he attacks Coke's views on law, and argues that law is essentially command; this is the voluntarist theory of law. What are the alternatives, and are they defensible? Hobbes' theory of punishment (chapter 28) is utilitarian rather than retributive. Do you agree with his arguments here? What is the historical context of the arguments on things that weaken a commonwealth in chapter 29? Though Hobbes' defends the sovereigns absolute power, he gives the sovereign a number of duties - especially in chapter 30. How consistent is his argument here? On what grounds does he defend the idea that sovereigns have duties?
In addition to the texts of Leviathan available on the Internet, there are many good published versions, including Edwin Curley's (published by Hackett; inexpensive and with good notes), and Richard Tuck's (perhaps the best attempt so far to get the text exactly right).
Tom Sorell, Hobbes, 1986;
Tom Sorell, ed., The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes, 1996;
Johann P. Sommerville, Thomas Hobbes: political ideas in historical context, 1992.
Richard Tuck, Hobbes, Oxford 1989.
Some links:
| John Aubrey's fine contemporary life of Hobbes . The same life is available at this site also. |
| Try this site for links to Hobbes' political works, plus a good, full reading list. |
| There is a timeline here (another is in my book) |
| An attack on Hobbes' ideas by one of his most important contemporaries, the (moderate) royalist statesman Edward Hyde, Earl of Clarendon |
 |
|---|
|
