2. thomas hobbes, leviathan, social, contract, theory

No description available.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• thomas hobbes
• leviathan
• social
• contract
• theory
• psychological egoism

[MrAnthonyVance]

Dr. Campbell, I sure love the way you CUSS in your lecture on Hobbes.

CUSS =. Clear, Understandable, Sensible, Succinct.

And your board visuals to assist learnning were superb and most creative.

Keep up the great teaching, Professor.

Applause!

[drjasonjcampbell]

@MrAnthonyVance LOL!! NICE!! That'll stick. I luv CUSSin in my videos!! haha...thanks for that...

[6PacJoe]

Can't one use the social contract theory to argue for a government-run universal health care -- to protect people not from each other but from illnesses and ruination?

[drjasonjcampbell]

I think you could. Healthcare is a big issue now and any arguments supporting giving helathcare to those in need is a move in the right direction. Peace.

[drjasonjcampbell]

...that 3rd party, the sovereign, isn't there to benefit others...the sovereign is there to specifically protect "me" from "them" There are many critiques of Hobbes' theory many valid ones but it's always good practice to be charitable to the author. I think the biggest critique, if one is trying to attack a weakness in his argument is assuming that human nature exists. That i don't believe in. egoist work together for their own self interest not the collective interest of others.

[drjasonjcampbell]

MrsDSpain: Hobbes says "So that in the nature of man, we find three principal causes of quarrel. First, competition; secondly, diffidence; thirdly, glory...Hereby it is manifest that during the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man..." Despite the fact that it's every man for himself there is a recognition that I may not be the strongest egoist and therefore need 3rd party

[Jay21232]

Thanks

[martinspoonboy]

surely when we go from a pre moral state into society governed by the sovereign we have not truly become moral but have been forced to be moral out of fear of the sovereign ? any thoughts ?

[sdoniac]

im a first year politics student and i have to write an essay on the critics of the social contract and this was a great understanding of what it is for me

[GGillin]

thankyou so much! this is great stuff for me, a first time philosophy student. Your explanation of this material puts my teacher and her seventeen years of post-secondary education to shame!

[Lewisabet8]

sir.. i really like your discussion! but you did not finish the discussion.. huhu may you please finish it...? please

[fredbloggs02]

That couldn't have been clearer. I'm missing out on school through a disorder for which I've already fallen years behind. It's down to people like you I have the chance to learn the foundation and, when I go back, I know I'll have the gist.

[Pigroota]

imperatives, not as "oughts". Thus, to exist in a state that preserves man's liberties and maintains peace, there must be a sovereign who mitigates and holds power. His imperatives are conclusions about "what conduceth to the conservation and defense of themselves (Leviathan)." There is much more. Ask me if you want to know. But remember, this philosophy is pre-enlightenment and is more useful today for its flaws than its aptness.

[Pigroota]

his theory chiefly from one main passion that is made strongest by anarchy - Fear. The sovereign upholds those laws to which there is the largest agreement. And this is tantamount to a form of government that originated in England 17Century, one that is the envy of the subjects of a dictatorship - democracy. One of 2 main criticisms of Hobbes is that he derives an "ought" from an "is", but this is not so. He actually treats his so-called "maxims of prudence" as

[Pigroota]

a political philosophy that reflects a need for a sovereign. He disagreed with the parliament of the time who stressed that power should be dispersed among the possessors of it. Rather, power should be concentrated in one body of men - the sovereign. Seemingly authoritarian, but these rules are emplaced for the preservation of men (as this guy describes - men would all kill each other otherwise). The state of anarchy augments those passions that are to the detriment of mankind. Thus he derives

[Pigroota]

@hamlit00 I will attempt an answer. Hobbes was concerned with the strongest of men's passions that derive from their relations with other men (although this does not reflect his method. Hobbes actually tried to determine these passions based on a society without relations (a unique approach) then overlayed society. This is critiqued by many, but the fundamentals are sound because passions come before the institutions and rules which he will discuss later). From these passions, he deduces