HOBBES’ ACCOUNT OF LIFE IN THE STATE OF NATURE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS
Sažetak
In an infamous paragraph in his magnum opus, Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes describes what he perceives to be the miserable condition of humankind in the state of nature, concluding that human life in this state is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” (Hobbes 1996, 84). To properly understand the relevance and implications of this claim, we shall first examine how the concept of a state of nature came to be. Then, we shall look at the specificities of Hobbes’ own account, pointing out certain generally neglected details. Afterward, we will analyze what some of Hobbes’ critics had to say on the issue, and how he either pre-emptively defended his claims or could have responded to them, based on his theory. Finally, we shall examine what might be the most complex and intriguing topic related to this subject: namely, how a defense of natural rights as inalienable could be constructed upon a foundation of a chaotic state of nature driven by scarcity and conflict.
Reference
Aristotle. 1998. Politics, C. D. C. Reeve (ed.). Indianapolis/Cambridge: Hackett Publishing Company.
Betts, Christopher. 1994. “Introduction”. The Social Contract, Christopher Betts (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Canessa, Andrew, and Manuela Lavinas Picq. 2024. Savages and Citizens: How Indigeneity Shapes the State. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Hobbes, Thomas. 1996. Leviathan, J. C. A. Gaskin (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hobbes, Thomas. 1998. De Cive, Richard Tuck and Michael Silverthorne (eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kant, Immanuel. 2006. “Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View, Part 2, Section E.” In Toward Perpetual Peace and Other Writings on Politics, Peace, and History, ed. Pauline Kleingeld, 164–176. New Haven: Yale University Press.
Locke, John. 2003. Two Treatises of Government, Ian Shapiro (ed.). New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Matić, Ivan. 2024. Natural Rights in Contractualist Thought. Institute for Political Studies, Belgrade.
Morgan, Lewis. 1877. Ancient Society. Chicago: Charles H. Herr & Company.
Plato. 2004. Republic, C. D. C. Reeve (ed.). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company.
Przybylinski, Stephen. 2023. Theorising Justice: A Primer for Social Scientists. Bristol: Bristol University Press.
Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. 1994. The Social Contract, Christopher Betts (ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Simmons, John. 1989. “Locke’s State of Nature.” Political Theory 17 (3): 449–470. DOI: 10.1177/0090591789017003005
Shanks, Torrey. 2019. “The Rhetoric of Self-Ownership.” Political Theory 47 (3): 311–337. DOI: 10.1177/0090591718786471
Sorell, Tom. 2021. “Hobbes’ Peace Dividend.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 38 (2): 137–154. DOI: 10.5406/21521026.38.2.03
Tarlton, Charles. 2001. “The Despotical Doctrine of Hobbes, Part I: The Liberalization of Leviathan.” History of Political Thought 22 (4): 587–618.
Thomas, Keith. 1963. “The Social Origins of Hobbes’ Political Thought.” K. C. Brown (ed.), Hobbes Studies. Oxford: Basil Blackwell: 185–236.
Udi, Juliana. 2015. “Locke and the Fundamental Right to Preservation: On the Convergence of Charity and Property Rights.” The Review of Politics 77 (2): 191–215. DOI: 10.1017/S0034670515000030
Waldron, Jeremy. 2005. “Nozick and Locke: Filling the Space of Rights.” In Natural Rights Liberalism from Locke to Nozick, eds. Ellen Paul, Fred Miller, and Jeffrey Paul, 81–110. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ward, Lee. 2017. “Thomas Hobbes and John Locke on a Liberal Right of Secession.” Political Research Quarterly 70 (4): 876–888. DOI: 10.1177/1065912917717818
Ward, Lee. 2020. “Equity and Political Economy in Thomas Hobbes.” American Journal of Political Science 64 (4): 823–836. DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12507
Zorzi, Graedon. 2019. “Liberalism and Locke’s Philosophical Anthropology.” The Review of Politics 81 (2): 183–205. DOI: 10.1017/S0034670518001183
