Why did Hobbes believe that absolute sovereigny was necessary?

Question

I have to do an essay... give me ideas please!!

Answer 1

I had written a long paper on this when i studied philosophy but couldnt find it- but here is the main idea: Hobbes believed that human beings' desire is unlimited therefore if human beings are set free, a state of war in unavoidable! In order to avoid this state of war, absolute sovereignty is necessary. there are of course serious critics of this theory (for example if the sovereign is a human being, how to choose it and why to give all the power to one person? )
The article in wikipedia is also very good, here are some quotations: (war of all against all is important!)

In the natural condition of mankind, while some men may be stronger or more intelligent than others, none is so strong and smart as to be beyond a fear of violent death. When threatened with death, man in his natural state cannot help but defend himself in any way possible. Self-defense against violent death is Hobbes' highest human necessity, and rights are borne of necessity. In the state of nature, then, each of us has a right, or license, to everything in the world. Due to the scarcity of things in the world, there is a constant, and rights-based, "war of all against all" (bellum omnium contra omnes). Life in the state of nature is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" (xiii).

But war is not in man's best interest. According to Hobbes, man has a self-interested and materialistic desire to end war — "the passions that incline men to peace are fear of death, desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living, and a hope by their industry to obtain them" (xiii, 14). He forms peaceful societies by entering into a social contract. According to Hobbes, society is a population beneath an authority, to whom all individuals in that society covenant just enough of their natural right for the authority to be able to ensure internal peace and a common defense. This sovereign, whether monarch, aristocracy or democracy (though Hobbes prefers monarchy), should be a Leviathan, an absolute authority. Law, for Hobbes, is the enforcement of contracts. The political theory of Leviathan varies little from that set out in two earlier works, The Elements of Law and De Cive (On The Citizen). (A minor aside: Hobbes almost never uses the phrase "state of nature" in his works.)

Hobbes's leviathan state is still authoritative in matters of aggression, one man waging war on another, or any matters pertaining to the cohesiveness of the state. It should say nothing about what any man does otherwise; so long as one man does no harm to any other, the sovereign should keep its hands off him (however, since there is no power above the sovereign, there is nothing to prevent the sovereign breaking this rule). In actuality, however, the extent to which this sovereign may exercise this authority is conditioned by the sovereign's obligations to natural law. Although the sovereign has no legislative obligations, it is more beneficial for him to abide by those laws which prescribe peace for security (the laws of nature.) Thus this conditions the authority of the sovereign with a prudential morality, or, more accurately, a moral obligation. A sovereign also maintains equality within the state, since the common people would be "washed out" in the glare of their sovereign; Hobbes compares this "washing out" of the common people in their sovereign's presence to the fading of the stars in the presence of the sun. In essence, Hobbes's political doctrine is "do no harm." His negative version of the Golden Rule, in chapter xiv, 35, reads: "Do not that to another, which thou wouldst not have done to thyself." This is contrasted with the Judeo-Christian golden rule, which encourages actively doing unto others: for Hobbes, that is a recipe for social chaos.

Answer 2

did you mean "sovereignty"?

Hobbes believes that humankind is only lead by egoistic impulses. If there would not be any sovereign power (he compares it to the Leviathan in the Bible) to control the human acts, there would be a world full of violence and chaos without any moving forward in neither culture nor knowledge. It is kind o hard for me to describe though, since English is not my native language and I learned all that in school in German, I'm trying my best to translate it right :) Hobbes called this the original state of humankind.

Answer 3

so as that we don't become imbalanced right here, permit me stress the certainty that Jesus has achieved each and all the artwork needed to save sinners. perception in a non-experience is worse than ineffective. Jesus FIRST had to do the artwork on the go and whilst he cried out 'it quite is done', you've got faith that the artwork of salvation became finished - finished. achieved. it quite is faith (perception) in what Christ did that saves sinners. that's what brings with regard to the hot delivery, via the Spirit. as quickly as a guy or woman has become spiritually alive, then they proceed to mature, to do each and all the 'issues' that must be the hallmark of a Christian, like exhibiting love, getting baptized, being a witness for Jesus, doing the reliable works that God arranged to be achieved in the past the creation of the international etc. This problematical question is basically a topic because of the fact people are staring on the completed 'kit' of what it potential to be a Christian. i'm staring on the ordinary, preliminary act of turning right into a Christian. purely after a guy or woman has become a Christian can they proceed to act as a Christian! people who're born lower back and who then get baptized in water comprehend large blessing for their obedience to Jesus' command. yet baptism, in and of itself, saves no-one! it quite is symbolic and additionally a public testimony and significant. yet if a clean Christian fails to get baptized (evaluate the thief on the go) they gained't lose their salvation. If that became the way it worked, then Christ's artwork on the go could have been incomplete, requiring us to characteristic a artwork of obedience to it. no longer so, my chum! some scriptures in this are: Luke 23:40 two-40 3 John 3:sixteen; 5:24-31 Acts 15:11; sixteen:31-32 Rom 10:9-13; 4:5 Gal 5:a million Eph 2:4-9 Heb 7:25 a million Jn a million:9

Answer 4

In just a few set of words. man is a predator of man. We are all equal, specially in the ability to harm others. Anyone can do damage on other, some by strength others by being cleaver and so on.
Absolute power means two things: People give up the right to harm others and that power is granted to someone else, State, in this case, so only the King has the power to harm.
That way, citizens only have one enemy from that moment on, they do not fight themselves, but only fear government.

Answer 5

Please forgive this,,, I mean no offense.

When I saw the Q, I was immediately sent to recall the comic strip "Calvin and Hobbes" and in many ways, this Q applies to those characters.

Great comic strip BTW.

Good luck with the answer, and essay.

Answer 6

It wasn't him, it was Calvin :)