Philosophy has long been a guiding force for those seeking to live a more meaningful and purposeful life. However, the vast amount of information available can often be overwhelming, making it difficult to focus on foundational ideas that truly matter. One such fundamental concept is Thomas Hobbes’s philosophy and his profound idea of the leviathan. Gaining a deeper understanding of this idea can greatly enhance how we apply philosophy to our lives. This article examines Hobbes’s philosophy, the concept of the leviathan, and their importance in the philosophical quest for a more meaningful existence.
Key features of Thomas Hobbes’s philosophy
Thomas Hobbes was a 17th-century philosopher best known for his political ideas, particularly about human nature and government. Hobbes believed that humans are inherently self-interested and driven by a desire for power and survival. Without a strong authority, society would descend into chaos and violence, a state he famously called the “state of nature.” To avoid this, Hobbes argued that people must agree to give up certain freedoms in exchange for security and order, creating a social contract.
One of Hobbes’s key ideas is the need for an absolute ruler or government to enforce this social contract. He thought that a powerful authority—a king, for example—was essential to maintain peace and prevent conflict. This idea is central to his work Leviathan, where he compares a strong government to a giant sea creature that protects society.
Hobbes also emphasized the importance of reason and self-preservation in shaping human actions. He believed that individuals would willingly agree to rules and authority if it ensured their survival and peace. While controversial, his ideas laid the foundation for modern political science and discussions about the role of government in society.
What is leviathan?
Thomas Hobbes viewed the leviathan as a powerful entity that symbolizes a strong and centralized authority. According to Hobbes, society needs a central power to maintain order and prevent chaos. He believed that without such authority, human life would fall into what he called the “state of nature,” a place of constant conflict where people are driven by their own self-interest. To avoid this, Hobbes argued that individuals must come together and agree to form a commonwealth, governed by a sovereign power. This sovereign, which he likened to the leviathan, has the ultimate authority to make and enforce laws, ensuring peace and stability within society. Hobbes emphasized that the leviathan’s absolute power is necessary to keep human behaviour in check and maintain harmony among individuals, as he thought humans naturally tend toward competition and distrust without rules or governance. This central authority, in Hobbes’s view, acts as a unifying force that enables civilization to function effectively.
This example helps to demonstrate this philosophical perspective. A simplified example of Thomas Hobbes’s view about the Leviathan could involve a group of individuals stranded on an isolated island. Initially, the group operates without rules, leading to chaos as everyone prioritizes their own survival and interests. Disputes over limited resources quickly erupt, and the lack of a central authority causes further conflict and disorganization. To bring order and security, the group decides to collectively establish a leader with absolute power who is responsible for making decisions and enforcing rules. This leader, acting as the “Leviathan,” ensures that everyone adheres to the agreements and resolves disputes fairly. Though some freedoms are surrendered for the sake of governance, the group finds stability and cooperation under this system, avoiding the turmoil and danger that existed before a central authority was established.
Challenges to Thomas Hobbes’s view about leviathan
Some philosophers have objected to Thomas Hobbes’s views about Leviathan because they see problems with the idea of a centralized, all-powerful authority as a foundation for a stable society. One significant concern is the potential for abuse of power. Critics argue that when too much power is concentrated in the hands of a single ruler or governing body, it increases the risk of tyranny and oppression. Philosophers like John Locke and others have stressed the idea that individuals have natural rights—such as life, liberty, and property—that no authority should infringe upon, even under the guise of maintaining order.
Another objection focuses on the reduction of individual freedom. Some thinkers believe that Hobbes’s vision asks individuals to give up too much autonomy for the sake of security. They see this trade-off as problematic, particularly if the authority governing them makes decisions that do not reflect the people’s will or interests. Philosophers who value democracy or collective decision-making often reject Hobbes’s emphasis on absolute authority and instead advocate for systems where power is distributed, ensuring accountability and better representation of the people.
Additionally, critics challenge the pessimistic view of human nature that underpins Hobbes’s reasoning. Philosophers like Jean-Jacques Rousseau, for example, rejected the idea that humans are inherently self-serving or prone to conflict in a state of nature. Rousseau argued that individuals can form cooperative communities without requiring an all-powerful authority to enforce order. This perspective presents an alternative view where societies are shaped more by mutual respect and collective agreement than submission to a ruling power.
Finally, some philosophers reject Hobbes’s approach on moral or ethical grounds. They argue that a government’s legitimacy cannot simply arise from the authority it wields but must also stem from the consent of those it governs and the moral quality of its rule. If a Leviathan-like authority acts unjustly, critics contend, people have a right to resist or reform it.
These objections highlight ongoing debates about governance, individual liberty, and the proper allocation of power, reflecting the diversity of thought among political philosophers.
Why leviathan is important to Thomas Hobbes’s philosophy
These are some of the main reasons why grasping the concept of the Leviathan is vital to comprehending Thomas Hobbes’s philosophy.
- It Reflects the Power of Authority
The philosophical idea of the leviathan highlights the importance of a strong, centralized authority in maintaining social order. It symbolizes how uniting individuals under a single source of power can prevent chaos and conflict. Without a guiding authority, societies may face instability, as people prioritize individual interests over collective well-being. The leviathan metaphor underscores the necessity of a governing force capable of enforcing laws, ensuring fairness, and fostering cooperation. This focus on authority helps convey the message that organization and structure are essential for a functioning society.
- It Explores Human Nature in Society
The leviathan concept encourages readers to reflect on the nature of humanity and how individuals interact when left without rules. It draws attention to the challenges of managing diverse interests, personalities, and needs within a group. This idea of a metaphorical leviathan serves as a way to address potential issues that arise from human tendencies, such as selfishness, competition, or fear. By addressing these traits, the concept provides insight into why societies must find ways to work together to ensure peace and avoid conflicts.
- It Highlights the Role of Social Contracts
The leviathan metaphor helps crystalize the concept of a social contract, where individuals agree to surrender some of their freedoms for the sake of stability, security, and progress. Without a collective agreement to form and uphold laws, societies risk descending into disarray. The leviathan demonstrates why people may willingly relinquish certain liberties to ensure protection and order. This notion reinforces the idea that humans create systems of governance to avoid the dangers of living in an unregulated or lawless environment.
Contrasting Thomas Hobbes’s philosophy with Mary Wollstonecraft’s philosophy
Thomas Hobbes and Mary Wollstonecraft had very different approaches to understanding human nature and the role of society. Hobbes’ concept of the Leviathan symbolized a powerful central authority that humans, driven by self-preservation and natural instincts, needed in order to avoid chaos and conflict. His idea was grounded in a belief that individuals must surrender some of their freedoms to this authority for the sake of safety and order.
Mary Wollstonecraft, on the other hand, focused on the potential for human improvement and equality, particularly highlighting the need for education and the empowerment of women. Rather than agreeing with Hobbes’ view of a centralized, almost absolute authority, Wollstonecraft argued for the development of reason and individual rights. Her philosophy emphasized the importance of challenging oppression and ignorance, often imposed by unjust systems or traditions, in order to achieve a more fair and balanced society.
The key difference between their philosophies lies in their views on authority and progress. Hobbes placed trust in strong authority as necessary for stability, while Wollstonecraft believed progress could only happen when individuals were educated and societies embraced equality. This contrast highlights the striking divergence between Hobbes’ focus on control through external structures and Wollstonecraft’s belief in internal growth and the potential for societal reform through enlightenment and education.
Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes’s philosophy and the meaning of life
Reflecting on Thomas Hobbes’s philosophy, particularly his ideas about the leviathan, holds value for living a more meaningful life, regardless of whether you agree with his views. At its core, his work encourages us to think deeply about the structure of society, the role of leadership, and the human need for order and cooperation. This reflection can serve as a foundation for understanding the dynamics of the world around us and the importance of nurturing relationships and systems that promote stability and mutual respect.
Considering Hobbes’s perspective invites us to examine our own roles within the broader framework of society. Whether we see ourselves as individuals working toward personal goals or as contributors to a collective effort, understanding the balance between personal freedom and social responsibility is key. This balance helps us recognize the value of compromise, empathy, and collaboration, essential tools for fostering more meaningful connections and relationships. By weighing these ideas, we are prompted to consider how our actions contribute to the betterment of those around us, enriching not just our lives but also the communities we are a part of.
Additionally, Hobbes’s writing challenges us to confront the nature of conflict and peace in our daily lives. Whether we agree with his solutions or not, reflecting on such issues can help us address challenges in our personal and professional environments. It prompts us to find ways to resolve disputes, create understanding, and prioritize harmony. This practice, when carried into our own lives, can translate into meaningful growth, both emotionally and intellectually.
Ultimately, wrestling with philosophical works like Hobbes’s helps us cultivate self-awareness. It encourages us to question not only the governance of society but also how we govern our own lives. Do we create order in our pursuits, align our actions with values, and contribute meaningfully to others? Reflecting on such ideas, even if we dissent from them, sharpens our perspective and shapes a sense of purpose. This engagement with philosophy serves as a tool for introspection, enabling us to live intentionally and with greater clarity.
Therefore, whether or not you align with Hobbes’s views, his ideas offer a lens through which we can examine the systems and relationships that define our existence. This examination is not only practically important but also essential for seeking a life filled with purpose and understanding.
Further reading
Dickinson, G.L. (1889). Hobbes (2nd ed.). London, England: Macmillan.
Hobbes, T. (1996). Leviathan (R. Tuck, Ed.). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. (Original work published 1651)
Hobbes, T. (1904). Leviathan, or, the matter, forme and power of a Commonwealth ecclesiasticall and civil (E. Curley, Ed.). Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
Hood, F.C. (1964). The divine politics of Thomas Hobbes. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press.
Johnston, D. (1986). The rhetoric of Leviathan: Thomas Hobbes and the politics of cultural transformation. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Malcolm, N. (2002). Aspects of Hobbes. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Skinner, Q. (2002). Visions of politics, Volume III: Hobbes and civil science. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Strauss, L. (1936). The political philosophy of Thomas Hobbes; its basis and its genesis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Tuck, R. (1989). Hobbes. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.