Hobbes' Influence On The Us Constitution

The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes is known for his political theories, which revolve around the problem of social and political order and how humans can coexist peacefully while avoiding civil conflict. Hobbes' ideas on social contracts, equality, and natural liberties inspired the US Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. While some of his ideas, such as his belief in absolute power, contradicted American governing principles, others were consistent with the country's founding ideals. Hobbes' influence can be seen in the US Constitution's emphasis on individual liberties and the social compact, where people consented to forming a government to maintain order and prevent chaos.

Explore related products

The Miracle of America: The Influence of the Bible on the Founding History & Principles of the United States for a People of Every Belief (3rd ed)

$33.18 $44.99

Heart of the Nation: Volunteering and America's Civic Spirit

$16.6 $28

Sacred Polities, Natural Law and the Law of Nations in the 16th-17th Centuries (History of European Political and Constitutional Thought, 7)

$160

Common Law and Natural Law in America (Law and Christianity)

$32 $32

Natural Law and the Antislavery Constitutional Tradition

$45 $45

Of the Social Contract and Other Political Writings

$10.23 $11

Hobbes's influence on the role of the executive branch

The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes, known for his political thought, has had some influence on the US Constitution, particularly in the role of the executive branch. Hobbes's political philosophy is chiefly concerned with how government must be organized to avoid civil war. He believed that human beings are by nature unsuited to political life, and that their natural condition is one of judgement and pursuit of self-interest.

Hobbes's view of the executive branch is that it should be led by a strong leader with a lot of power. In his view, citizens sign over their autonomy to the sovereign, who has absolute power. This is a stark contrast to the US Constitution, which divides powers between the legislative, executive, and judicial branches, with checks and balances in place to prevent the concentration of power in one branch. The writers of the US Constitution specifically did not want a very strong executive leader, and the presidency became a powerful role only a century later.

Hobbes's idea of a strong, centralized leader can be seen in his work "Leviathan", where he argues that absolute monarchy is the best form of government. Hobbes believed that the alternative to a single, unaccountable sovereign was a state of nature that closely resembled civil war, where human cooperation is impossible. This view is not in line with the US Constitution, which aims to distribute power and prevent the concentration of power in a single person or group.

However, it is important to note that Hobbes's influence on the US Constitution may be overstated. While his ideas on the social contract may have had some impact, the nuts and bolts of the Constitution are more influenced by thinkers such as Montesquieu and Locke, who were critics of Hobbes. Additionally, Hobbes's contempt for scholastic philosophy and his admiration for the emerging scientific method may have influenced how he expressed his moral and political ideas.

In conclusion, while Hobbes's political philosophy, particularly his views on the role of the executive branch, may have had some influence on the US Constitution, the Constitution ultimately deviates from Hobbes's ideas in significant ways, particularly in its rejection of a strong, centralized leader and its embrace of the division of powers.

Hobbes's preference for absolute monarchy

Thomas Hobbes is known for his views on social and political order, specifically how human beings can coexist peacefully and avoid the dangers of civil conflict. Hobbes' philosophy centres on the belief that humans are inherently self-interested, which often leads to conflict and war. To prevent this, Hobbes argued for an absolute monarchy, where a single sovereign holds ultimate power and makes decisions on all social and political issues without accountability.

Hobbes' preference for absolute monarchy stems from his conception of human nature and the belief that men's nature leads to war. In his view, an absolute monarch is preferable to the state of war that would otherwise exist. He argues that without a common power, society would devolve into a state of nature closely resembling civil war, characterised by universal insecurity and the constant threat of violent death.

Hobbes' justification for absolute monarchy is laid out in his seminal work, "Leviathan". In it, he proposes that individuals voluntarily surrender their autonomy to the sovereign, creating a social contract. According to Hobbes, threats of force do not deprive us of liberty because liberty is the freedom of motion, and we are only restricted if we are physically enchained. If individuals yield to threats of violence or obey the sovereign out of fear, Hobbes considers this a choice. This obedience then constitutes a promise to continue obeying, and promises carry significant moral weight in Hobbes' philosophy.

While Hobbes acknowledges ancient forms of government like aristocracy and democracy, he favours monarchy due to the unity it provides. A single person at the apex, with fixed rules of succession, prevents disputes over leadership. However, Hobbes does not specify whether the sovereign should be a king or a queen, and he concedes that the identity of the sovereign is not essential to his system.

Hobbes' ideas on absolute monarchy have been criticised as draconian and extreme, and some argue that his proposed system would lead to monarchical terrorism, where the monarch is at war with their subjects. Despite these criticisms, Hobbes' philosophy remains relevant to contemporary politics, influencing the structure of governments and the separation of powers.

Hobbes's ideas on social contracts

Thomas Hobbes, the English philosopher, is best known for his political philosophy. Hobbes's main concern was the problem of social and political order, and his vision of the world remains strikingly original and relevant to contemporary politics. He wanted to understand how human beings can live together in peace and avoid the dangers and fears of civil conflict.

Hobbes's social contract theory is an attempt to justify and delimit political authority on the grounds of individual self-interest and rational consent. Hobbes's theory of the social contract is that the state of nature is one in which there are no enforceable criteria of right and wrong. In such a state, people take for themselves all that they can, and human life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short". It is a state of war, which can be ended only if individuals agree to give up their liberty to a sovereign, on the condition that their lives are safeguarded by sovereign power. Hobbes believed that the authority of the sovereign is absolute, and no authority is above the sovereign, whose will is law.

Hobbes's social contract theory is based on his mechanistic picture of the world. According to Hobbes, threats of force do not deprive us of liberty. Liberty, he says, is the freedom of motion, and one is free to move whichever way they wish unless physically enchained. If an individual obeys the sovereign out of fear of punishment or the state of nature, that is their choice. Such obedience constitutes a promise to continue to obey. Promises carry a huge moral weight for Hobbes.

Hobbes's social contract theory is not without controversy. One of the main controversies is whether Hobbes sees human beings as purely self-interested or egoistic. Another controversy is that Hobbes does not provide a clear answer to the question of why a coerced promise should be binding, given the wrong committed by the coercer in threatening and demanding valuables.

Hobbes's social contract theory has had a pervasive influence on social, political, and moral philosophy. It has been one of the most dominant theories in Western moral and political theory. Hobbes's theory has also been critiqued and built upon by later philosophers, such as John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who share a lot of commonalities with Hobbes but are also critics of his work.

Explore related products

The Social Contract and The Discourses (Everyman's Library)

$28

The Social Contract (Classics of World Literature) (Wordsworth Classics of World Literature)

$7.99

The Social Contract

$0.99 $5.99

Rousseau: The Social Contract and Other Later Political Writings (Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought)

$23.35 $26

The Social Contract

$10.95

Discourse on Political Economy and The Social Contract (Oxford World's Classics)

$8.52 $9.95

Hobbes's views on equality

Thomas Hobbes is known for his views on political philosophy, particularly his ideas about social and political order. Hobbes was concerned with how human beings can live together peacefully and avoid civil conflict. He believed that people should either give their obedience to an unaccountable sovereign or face a "state of nature" that closely resembles civil war. In this state of nature, there is universal insecurity, a constant fear of violent death, and a lack of rewarding human cooperation.

Hobbes' views on equality are complex and have been the subject of scholarly debate. In his core works, including "Leviathan", Hobbes presents an "equality-based" account of equity, which has legal, political, and social implications. This equality-based approach is in contrast to the ""correction-based" account presented in his "Dialogue", which focuses on judicial interpretation and has no explicit connection to equality.

Hobbes' concept of equality is closely tied to his understanding of liberty and promises. He defines liberty as the freedom of motion, suggesting that threats of force do not deprive us of liberty as long as we are not physically enchained. When individuals yield to threats of violence or obey the sovereign out of fear, Hobbes considers it a choice that constitutes a promise to continue obeying. Promises hold significant moral weight in Hobbes' philosophy, as they do in all social contract theories.

While Hobbes emphasizes individual liberty, his preferred form of government is monarchy. He argues that the unity achieved through a single person at the apex, along with fixed rules of succession, makes monarchy superior to other forms of government like aristocracy or democracy. Hobbes' support for an all-powerful sovereign has been a controversial aspect of his philosophy, especially when compared to the division of powers in the US Constitution.

In summary, Hobbes' views on equality are multifaceted and interconnected with his concepts of liberty, promises, and sovereignty. While he emphasizes individual freedom, Hobbes ultimately advocates for a powerful sovereign to maintain social and political order, a position that has sparked ongoing discussions and interpretations of his work.

Hobbes's views on natural liberties

Thomas Hobbes's views on natural liberties are a core aspect of his political philosophy, which centres on the problem of social and political order and how to avoid civil conflict. Hobbes's conception of natural liberties is distinct from natural laws, which he describes as "a precept, or general rule, found out by reason, by which a man is forbidden to do, that, which is destructive of his life, or taketh away the means of preserving his life".

In his natural state, according to Hobbes, man's life consists entirely of liberties and not of laws. This state of nature is characterised by a right of nature, where each individual has a liberty right to preserve themselves and do whatever they judge necessary for their preservation. This right of nature becomes, in practice, an unlimited right to anything, which Hobbes terms "a right to all things". This situation, where every man has a right to every thing, including one another's bodies, leads to a “war of all against all”, where human beings kill, steal, and enslave to stay alive.

Hobbes argues that the only way to escape this state of nature is to submit to an unaccountable sovereign, who has absolute authority and decides every social and political issue. This submission to a sovereign is a choice, according to Hobbes, and does not deprive individuals of their liberty. He further argues that promises made under threat of violence are freely made and carry a moral weight, which justifies obedience to the sovereign. This obedience constitutes a promise to continue obeying, and individuals retain the liberty of disobeying the sovereign when their lives, families, or honour are at stake.

Frequently asked questions