Leviathan: With Selected Variants from the Latin Edition of 1668 by Thomas Hobbes

Jan 12, 2008

Charissa rated it

· review of another edition

Recommends it for: nobody!

Recommended to Charissa by: Linda my undergraduate philosophy professor

Shelves: weltanschauung, threw-across-room

Not only did I disagree with Hobbes' conclusions, I find his assumptions (his arguments based entirely in Christian perspective) essentially worthless. The only value this tract served to me is to "know thy enemy". This is a classic example of mental circus tricks being used to justify the march of Christian dominance across the globe. I can't think of any written text that I despise more, except perhaps Mein Kempf.

Hobbes is my least favorite philosopher. He embodies ev...more

like 10 likes

· see review

Jun 05, 2011

Mel Vincent rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: political-philosophy

This is truly the greatest written political work of all time. It meticulously dissects the areas of the political body and mind, the Leviathan itself, and it also deals with the fundamental properties that enable that political body to work such as human reason, ideology, government and also religion.

Every question that I have conceived within the confines of my mind, this book has answered it perfectly and efficiently. It is amazing how Thomas Hobbes has argued, analyzed and even c...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Dec 02, 2011

Andrew rated it

· review of another edition

Leviathan is a major work of philosophy. Full stop.

It's interesting to think that this book is the fundamental root of a lot of ultra-conservative brains. On some level, I can understand this. Hobbes defends the divine right of royal power (to a certain extent) and proceeds to define this power as absolute. Without question, subjects must bow to their masters, under any circumstances. In all this, however, he ultimately says that a monarch's power is granted him by his subjects, for ...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Oct 03, 2011

Naxa rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, psychology

Many people when talking about philosophy pose the question, who is the most misunderstood philosopher in history? The most often heard candidate I hear is "Nietzsche." Though since Bertrand Russell's rather ill informed expose on him in A HISTORY OF WESTERN PHILOSOPHY, I can say Nietzsche has had quite a good public relations campaign in the last half century or so since. There are a few philosophers who history still hasn't given an adequate reevaluation, Hobbes is one such philosoph...moreMany people when talking about philosophy pose the question, who is the most misunderstood philosopher in history? The most often heard candidate I hear is "Nietzsche." Though since Bertrand Russell's rather ill informed expose on him in A HISTORY OF WESTERN PHILOSOPHY, I can say Nietzsche has had quite a good public relations campaign in the last half century or so since. There are a few philosophers who history still hasn't given an adequate reevaluation, Hobbes is one such philosopher.

Often overlooked or belittled because of his political philosophy which has taken precedent over everything else he has done. For that being his most remembered contribution to philosophy, you think people would get his views on it right. No such luck for Hobbes, he is even widely misunderstood in the one area he is most remembered for.

Hobbes became interested in philosophy much later in life than most. He disputed a well known aspect of Euclidean geometry to a friend and was quickly rebuked with a proof of what he disputed. Rather then being dismayed, Hobbes was amazed by the power of reason to change a persons mind so definitively. He quickly became immersed in the accumulated knowledge of his era.

Other than political philosophy, Hobbes was one of the first people to formulate the idea of psychological egoism. He was the first of his era to have a now commonly held view of humans as complex biological machines. The general philosophical idea wasn't new but he gave the best exposition of the problem of compositional identity in his "Ship of Theseus" metaphor. An undercurrent of his philosophy which was radical at the time and still radical to this day, is his emphasis on materialism something we wouldn't see again in philosophy until David Hume a century or so later. Although he firmly held to materialistic views, Hobbes was one of the few of this early era of Science, then called natural philosophy to have a critical eye towards the methodology, while still contributing and putting his own ideas forward. In the history of the philosophy of science, Hobbes was the first to put forward the problem of instruments. An idea that can be summed up as, "are we discovering things with our instruments or manufacturing them?" A problem we still cant get around to some degree and that has plagued science based on complex instruments ever since.

Hobbes has had many contributions outside of political philosophy that are still important today. In this book he does focus on political philosophy though and his position though commonly stated as being thus: Since life without government is nasty brutish in short, we should have an absolute ruler with no caveats or further justification. Hobbes didn't believe in absolute rulers and he didn't exclude himself from being a party to psychological egoism. He saw government as a necessary evil, but still saw that it had its drawbacks. That is why he didn't believe rulers were chosen by divine providence or through any other means then materialistic forces such as popular consensus and his formulation of the social contract. He was the first person to put forward the idea of a social contract, or a secular approach to how governments form. He thought unjust rulers were tyrants and that they should be resisted as such. He thought Aristocratic and church interests separate a nation and as such they and their interests should be separated from the sovereignty much more than they were in his time. Hobbes without saying put forward the earliest formulation I know of between positive and negative liberty.

He heavily criticized miracles and supernatural forces and believed god if existing was a naturalistic being within the same universe as us. More than half of this book is dedicated to refuting or extremely deflating super-natural ideas. His views were far from complacent or in the line of the status quo and as such he drew criticism and even talk of death threats and excommunications from virtually every corner of political power over his views in Leviathan. He was also barred from writing in the United Kingdom and excluded from lucrative academic posts and groups.

Berkeley is often touted as the extreme road taken on the mental half of Cartesian dualism. Although Hobbes came first I think he can be similarly seen as the extreme half of the materialist side of the coin. Seeing as idealism ultimately led to Hegel. It is Funny that Hegel and Hobbes philosophy though on two totally opposite sides of the philosophical dualistic road led to a lot of the same conclusions. A super entity that represents the people, an approach to knowledge that takes a historical account and an ambiguous redundant god that seems to take a novelty place in both philosophies and unwavering support of kings instead of the other governmental options.

Leviathan is an important, but hard read. Not for those new to philosophy or political science. I would recommend it to those who have done their homework and who can really appreciate and see that Hobbes is not as bad as history has made him out to be. His political philosophy has ultimately been proven to be historically inaccurate and to an extent irrelevant today. There are however aspects of it, that we use and owe to Hobbes to this day.
(less)

like 2 likes

· see review

Jan 09, 2011

Cody rated it

· review of another edition

Leviathan is really four books: "Of Man," "Of Common-wealth," "Of a Christian Common-wealth," and "Of the Kingdom of Darkness." The first book is the philosophical framework for Leviathan. The remaining books elaborate upon the arguments presented in the beginning:
• "Of Common-wealth" discusses rights of sovereigns and subjects and goes over the legislative mechanics of the commonwealth.
• "Of a Christian Common-wealth" discu...moreLeviathan is really four books: "Of Man," "Of Common-wealth," "Of a Christian Common-wealth," and "Of the Kingdom of Darkness." The first book is the philosophical framework for Leviathan. The remaining books elaborate upon the arguments presented in the beginning:
• "Of Common-wealth" discusses rights of sovereigns and subjects and goes over the legislative mechanics of the commonwealth.
• "Of a Christian Common-wealth" discusses the compatibility of Christian doctrine with Hobbes' idea of the Leviathan.
• "Of the Kingdom of Darkness" discusses false religious beliefs and argues that the political implementation of the Leviathan is needed to achieve a secure Christian commonwealth.

Hobbes starts off by considering the motions of matter, arguing that every aspect of human nature can be deduced from materialist principles. He depicts the natural condition of mankind as inherently violent, awash with fear. He claims the state of nature is the "war of every man against every man," in which people constantly seek to destroy one another. This state is so horrible that human beings seek peace, and the best way to achieve peace is to construct the Leviathan, a commonwealth head by a sovereign ruling head, through a social contract.

I can see Hobbes' influence in Locke and Hume. And while I admire the methodical way in which he wrote, in my opinion it is an extreme view to feel mankind is condemned with incurable violence or as Hobbes put it in Leviathan, a "war of all against all." And I disagree with his famous, oft-quoted statement that "men's lives are solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

I believe Hobbes' analysis of human nature, like everyone else's, is a reflection of his own views of himself. While I would never underestimate the power of fear, as world leaders of history have used it greatly to their advantage, there is much to be said for human dignity and empathy. There is much to be said for love and compassion.

And like Nietzsche, Hobbes also goes out of his way to speak with an atheistic attitude, all the while seeming to give credence to the very thing he does not seem to want to believe in. One can not vehemently oppose an idea, if that idea does not exist. Fighting an idea only gives that idea more power.

Hobbes' Leviathan is far too fascist and totalitarian for my tastes and I prefer Rousseau's more positive view of man. Men's behavior is a reflection of how they are treated. Or as Johann Wolfgang von Goethe put it, "Treat people as if they were what they ought to be and you help them to become what they are capable of being."(less)

like 1 like

· see review

Nov 19, 2010

Austin Ratner rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, nonfiction

Hobbes reminds me, in a good way, of the ape who learned to act like a human being in Kafka's hilarious short story, "A Report to an Academy." The Kafka story begins:

"Honored members of the Academy! You have done me the honor of inviting me to give your Academy an account of the life I formerly led as an ape. I regret that I cannot comply with your request to the extent you desire. It is now nearly five years since I was an ape, a short space of time, perhaps, according...moreHobbes reminds me, in a good way, of the ape who learned to act like a human being in Kafka's hilarious short story, "A Report to an Academy." The Kafka story begins:

"Honored members of the Academy! You have done me the honor of inviting me to give your Academy an account of the life I formerly led as an ape. I regret that I cannot comply with your request to the extent you desire. It is now nearly five years since I was an ape, a short space of time, perhaps, according to your calendar, but an infinitely long time to gallop through at full speed, as I have done, more or less accompanied by excellent mentors, good advice, applause, orchestral music, and yet essentially alone...."

Hobbes trains his attention on our primate nature, a nature prone to quarreling from three principal causes, as he sees it (p. 185, Penguin Classics ed.): Competition, Diffidence (i.e., fear), and Glory. And we are motivated in our quarrels accordingly, says Hobbes, by the objectives of Gain, Safety, and Reputation. I hear ya, brother, give me some of all that. He sure is preaching to the ape.

Many people think of Hobbes as a cynic with a low opinion of human beings. But that's wrong. On the contrary, Hobbes is very sympathetic with us hungry beings in need of food, safety, and respect. He is far more sympathetic to innate Desire than St. Augustine, for example:

"But neither of us [Hobbes himself and the average man who locks his doors at night] accuse mans nature in it. The Desires, and other Passions of man, are in themselves no Sin. No more are the Actions, that proceed from those passions, till they know a law that forbids them...." (p. 187)

Another reviewer expresses hatred for Hobbes because of his supposed endorsement of the reign of Christendom. There is a late section in Leviathan on "Christian Common-Wealth," and I confess I haven't read very much of that part, but what I did read was nothing other than an attempt to compel people with Christian morals to see that the Bible does not invalidate or supercede his rationalist political and moral philosophy. In Part II, "Of Common-Wealth," which I have read thoroughly, he makes it pretty clear what he thinks of religious claims to political authority (p. 230):

"And whereas some men have pretended for their disobedience to their Soveraign, a new Covenant, made, not with men, but with God; this also is unjust: for there is no Covenant with God.... But this pretence of Covenant with God, is so evident a lye, even in the pretenders own consciences, that it is not onely an act of an unjust, but also of a vile, and unmanly disposition."

All righty then. His revolution was the systematic application of reason to the planning of society; he derived his conclusions from first principles of human passions that he didn't intuit but observed, in others and also in himself--he exhorts us (p. 82), Nosce teipsum: Read thy self. Supposedly he knew Descartes and Galileo and was influenced by them; like them, he is one of those Leviathans of rationalist, humanist Renaissance thought who laid the groundwork for the Enlightenment. He was less imaginative than John Locke, it's true, when it came to the possible forms of political representation, but it was he, before Locke, who described government as a social contract between men by which those men defend themselves from each other and from their own passions; it was Hobbes who described government as a representative of its citizens and not of God.

It's impossible not to love the engraving on the cover of the Penguin Classics edition, which comes from the frontispiece of the original from 1651. Across the top it reads, "Non est potestas Super Terram quae Comparetur ei," meaning "There is no power on earth which can be compared to him." That's a quote from Job about a "big, ugly monster" as my three-year-old would say. But Hobbes means something different: he means the monarch who embodies the interests and security not of God but of human beings.(less)

like

· see review

Aug 19, 2010

Laura rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: assigned-reading, classic

Though considered to be one of the most influential works of political thought, this manages to be both tedious and frightening – tedious because of Hobbes’s labored phrasing and protracted reasoning, and frightening because his conclusions have been put into play by stars like Stalin and Pol Pot. In brief, Hobbes argues for a strong central government headed by an absolute sovereign.

Frankly, I can’t imagine anyone liking Hobbes, as his take on social contract theory supports the th...more

like 5 likes

· see review

Jun 03, 2010

Rowland Bismark rated it

· review of another edition

Leviathan, Hobbes's most important work and one of the most influential philosophical texts produced during the seventeenth century, was written partly as a response to the fear Hobbes experienced during the political turmoil of the English Civil Wars. In the 1640s, it was clear to Hobbes that Parliament was going to turn against King Charles I, so he fled to France for eleven years, terrified that, as a Royalist, he would be persecuted for his support of the king. Hobbes composed Leviathan whil...moreLeviathan, Hobbes's most important work and one of the most influential philosophical texts produced during the seventeenth century, was written partly as a response to the fear Hobbes experienced during the political turmoil of the English Civil Wars. In the 1640s, it was clear to Hobbes that Parliament was going to turn against King Charles I, so he fled to France for eleven years, terrified that, as a Royalist, he would be persecuted for his support of the king. Hobbes composed Leviathan while in France, brilliantly articulating the philosophy of political and natural science that he had been developing since the 1630s. Hobbes's masterwork was finally published in 1651, two years after Parliament ordered the beheading of Charles I and took over administration of the English nation in the name of the Commonwealth.

Leviathan's argument for the necessity of absolute sovereignty emerged in the politically unstable years after the Civil Wars, and its publication coincided with that of many Republican treatises seeking to justify the regicide (killing of the king) to the rest of Europe (John Milton's Tenure of Kings and Magistrates is a famous example of these regicide tracts). Not only was the political argument of Leviathan controversial at the time of its publication, but the philosophical method employed by Hobbes to make his claims also scandalized many of his contemporaries--even those writers, such as Robert Filmer (the author of the Royalist tract Patriarcha), who otherwise supported Hobbes's claims for absolute sovereignty.

Hobbes's materialist philosophy was based upon a mechanistic view of the universe, holding that all phenomena were explainable purely in terms of matter and motion, and rejecting concepts such as incorporeal spirits or disembodied souls. Consequently, many critics labeled Hobbes an atheist (although he was not, in the strict sense). Associated with both atheism and the many deliberately terrifying images of Leviathan, Hobbes became known as the "Monster of Malmsbury" and the "Bug-bear of the Nation." In 1666, Hobbes's books were burned at Oxford (where Hobbes had graduated from Magdalen College in 1608), and the resulting conflagration was even blamed in Parliament for having started the Great Fire of London. The chaotic atmosphere of England in the aftermath of the Civil Wars ensured that Hobbes's daring propositions met with a lively reaction.

Hobbes knew that Leviathan would be controversial, for not only did the text advocate restoration of monarchy when the English republic was at its strongest (Oliver Cromwell was not instituted as Lord High Protector until 1653, and the Restoration of Charles II did not occur until 1660), but Hobbes's book also challenged the very basis of philosophical and political knowledge. Hobbes claimed that traditional philosophy had never arrived at irrefutable conclusions, that it had instead offered only useless sophistries and insubstantial rhetoric; he thus called for a reform of philosophy that would enable secure truth--claims with which everyone could agree. Consequently, Hobbesian philosophy would prevent disagreements about the fundamental aspects of human nature, society, and proper government. Furthermore, because Hobbes believed that civil war resulted from disagreements in the philosophical foundations of political knowledge, his plan for a reformed philosophy to end divisiveness would also end the conditions of war. For Hobbes, civil war was the ultimate terror, the definition of fear itself. He thus wanted to reform philosophy in order to reform the nation and thereby vanquish fear.

Earlier in the seventeenth century, Francis Bacon--for whom Hobbes had served as secretary in his youth--had also proposed a reform of philosophy, a reform he called the "Great Instauration." Bacon's program was an inductive philosophy based upon the observation of natural facts ("inductive" reasoning derives general principles from particular instances or facts); the experimental manipulation of nature of Bacon's scheme was very influential for the development of the historical period commonly called the Scientific Revolution, and also formed the backbone of the English Royal Society. Like Hobbes's, Bacon's system rejected traditional philosophical knowledge as untrustworthy, instead embracing nature as the only sure basis for all claims for truth. But Hobbes argued that the experimentalist program was also unsuccessful in providing secure, indisputable knowledge. Hobbes therefore rejected the Baconian system and argued vehemently against it. Hobbes's own deductive scientific philosophy was not experimental--in "deductive" reasoning, a conclusion follows necessarily from the stated premises, rather than being inferred from instances of these premises--but Hobbes maintained that it provided better understanding of the universe and society than both traditional philosophy and experimental science.

Leviathan attempted to create controversy in politics and in science, radically challenging both contemporary government and philosophy itself; yet, despite its very invocation of controversy, Leviathan sought ultimately to annihilate controversy for good. Hobbes's philosophical method claimed to provide indisputable conclusions, and its depiction of the Leviathan of society suggested that the Hobbesian method could put an end to controversy, war, and fear. Hobbes's philosophy was highly influential in certain sectors (Hobbesism was a fashionable intellectual position well into the eighteenth century). However, Hobbes, who died in 1679, never lived to see his work achieve the widespread and totalizing effects for which he had hoped. Excluded from the Royal Society for his anti-experimentalist stance and derided by many contemporaries as an immoral monster, Hobbes neither transformed the nation nor reformed philosophy as he had envisioned. Nonetheless, Hobbes has had a lasting influence in the history of Western philosophy, as he is credited with inaugurating political science; his crowning achievement, Leviathan is still recognized as one of the greatest masterpieces of the history of ideas. Written during a moment in English history when the political structure, social structure, and methods of science were all in flux and open to manipulation, Leviathan played an essential role in the development of the modern world.

Leviathan is divided into four books: "Of Man," "Of Common-wealth," "Of a Christian Common-wealth," and "Of the Kingdome of Darknesse." Book I contains the philosophical framework for the entire text, while the remaining books simply extend and elaborate the arguments presented in the initial chapters. Consequently, Book I is given the most attention in the detailed summaries that follow. Hobbes begins his text by considering the elementary motions of matter, arguing that every aspect of human nature can be deduced from materialist principles. Hobbes depicts the natural condition of mankind--known as the state of nature--as inherently violent and awash with fear. The state of nature is the "war of every man against every man," in which people constantly seek to destroy one another. This state is so horrible that human beings naturally seek peace, and the best way to achieve peace is to construct the Leviathan through social contract.

Book II details the process of erecting the Leviathan, outlines the rights of sovereigns and subjects, and imagines the legislative and civil mechanics of the commonwealth. Book III concerns the compatibility of Christian doctrine with Hobbesian philosophy and the religious system of the Leviathan. Book IV engages in debunking false religious beliefs and arguing that the political implementation of the Leviathanic state is necessary to achieve a secure Christian commonwealth.

Hobbes's philosophical method in Leviathan is modeled after a geometric proof, founded upon first principles and established definitions, and in which each step of argument makes conclusions based upon the previous step. Hobbes decided to create a philosophical method similar to the geometric proof after meeting Galileo on his extended travels in Europe during the 1630s. Observing that the conclusions derived by geometry are indisputable because each of constituent steps is indisputable in itself, Hobbes attempted to work out a similarly irrefutable philosophy in his writing of Leviathan.(less)

like 2 likes

· see review

May 31, 2009

Steven Peterson rated it

· review of another edition

Three essential hallmarks of the Hobbesian system are important: the war of each against all, the role of human rationality in ending this; the use of knowledge/science as a basis for societal engineering. His view of the state of nature--that time before government and the state existed--is unsurprising when one understands that he was born in the year of the erstwhile invasion by the Spanish Armada (1588) and lived through civil turmoil and revolution in England throughout his life.

...moreThree essential hallmarks of the Hobbesian system are important: the war of each against all, the role of human rationality in ending this; the use of knowledge/science as a basis for societal engineering. His view of the state of nature--that time before government and the state existed--is unsurprising when one understands that he was born in the year of the erstwhile invasion by the Spanish Armada (1588) and lived through civil turmoil and revolution in England throughout his life.

Hobbes begins with a view of human life that would be inconceivable to the Greeks--life in a state of nature, the time before government, laws, and the state existed. In this state, humans are equal. In terms of physical prowess, of course, some are stronger than others. However, the weakest, through guile, can still kill the strongest. In that sense, there is equality. Without the power of government to keep people in check, though, we find quarrels routinely breaking out. The motives are threefold: self-gain, safety, and reputation (or glory). The result is horrible, and here follows perhaps the single most well known statement penned by Hobbes: "Hereby it is manifest, that during the time men live without a common Power to keep them all in awe, they are in a condition which is called Warre; and such a warre, as is of every man, against every man. . . .In such condition, there is no place for Industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain; and consequently no Culture of the Earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by Sea; no commodious Building; no Instruments of moving, and removing such things as require much force; no Knowledge of the face of the Earth; no account of Time; no Arts; no Letters; no Society; and which is worst of all, continual feare, and danger of violent death; And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short."

However, the fear and terror of the state of nature can be escaped. Humans are, after all, according to Hobbes, capable of reason. Individual reason leads people to realize that they must do something to escape ". . .Feare of Death; Desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living; and a Hope by their Industry to obtain them." Furthermore, human reason allows individuals to understand laws of nature. This is defined by Hobbes 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 the same." To preserve life, and the fruits of industry that might be gained by peace, human reason lets people realize that only by giving up some of their freedoms, liberties, rights in order to establish a system that will end perpetual war of each against all. The mechanism for this is the "social contract," by which people in the state of nature covenant with one another to form a powerful government, so powerful that it can suppress individuals' efforts to seek self-advantage as under the state of nature. A "Leviathan" is needed.

However, if the state ceases to protect people's lives, the contract can be voided; revolution is an acceptable option for the citizenry then. However, the price is terrible, for with the dissolution of the state, people are plunged back into the nightmare of the state of nature. They would have to re-enact a contract to escape the ravages of the perpetual war.

Key points in Hobbes: the focus is on the individual rather than society, hence this is an individualistic system; human reason is considered to be central to attaining peace and harmony; humans can perceive the essence of natural laws through the powers of their reason; by contracting with one another, the people can control their destinies and produce an environment which they find more commodious for living fruitfully. An important early work in the development of Modern thinking and liberal political thought. A must read work for those interested in Western political philosophy.
(less)

like 3 likes

· see review

Mar 25, 2010

Esiasch rated it

· review of another edition

If it were not for the fact that the "Leviathan" is a foundational text of any serious study of the history of political philosophy, this book would be better off collecting dust on some neglected shelf. That is not to say that it is not an impressive and well thought out work but rather that it is dated. There are practical applications to the information one can obtain inside its pages but they are few and far between and hold little actual value save for the obvious historical purpo...more

like

· see review

Oct 31, 2011

Alex rated it

· review of another edition

Hobbes’s Leviathan appears draconian to most Americans who ascribe to classical liberal values. Their rejection of his social contract coincides with an optimistic Lockean faith in the capabilities and moral fortitude necessary for negative liberties to survive in a commonwealth. This naïveté in political legitimacy is analogous to the popularity of the New Testament compared to the Old because, while both texts share equal moral instruction, we fervently prefer a loving and forgiving God to a b...moreHobbes’s Leviathan appears draconian to most Americans who ascribe to classical liberal values. Their rejection of his social contract coincides with an optimistic Lockean faith in the capabilities and moral fortitude necessary for negative liberties to survive in a commonwealth. This naïveté in political legitimacy is analogous to the popularity of the New Testament compared to the Old because, while both texts share equal moral instruction, we fervently prefer a loving and forgiving God to a brutal taskmaster. Hobbesian pessimism in human nature is a cold bucket of water tempering our enthusiastic assumption of a free polis because it demonstrates how democratic freedom is contingent upon the behavior everyone demonstrates.

My political science professor’s ad hominem disparagement of Hobbes as paranoid and neurotic was troubling, given that Hobbes’s support for a Leviathan with absolute sovereignty remains a soberly empirical definition of power and fundamental governmental purpose. Fear of death is the primary motivation for our surrender to political authority. The legitimacy of a commonwealth therefore necessitates the capability of retributive action against internal and external threats. The power of the individual and group is relational to the behavioral impact they exact on others. Individual rights and liberties independent of government remain the exception, not the rule, of most persons throughout recorded history, past and present.

How and why do the rights outlined by John Locke, that we often take for granted, exist at all? They depend on the internal morality of the individual who receives them, which themselves depend on Enlightenment values held dear by everyone around that person. I do not think that we are born blank slates in the state of nature or cynically view moral sentiments as a vacuous societal construction. Reading Hobbes’s brutal state and laws of nature, however, brought to mind the inculcations of parents, Sunday School instructors and Sesame Street screenwriters. Socrates’s description of a rational portion of our brain that holds back the appetitive beast within us, for example, is emblematic of an internal Leviathan each individual conscience tacitly consents to for a free society to be possible

The gradual shift in favorability towards democracy, from Socratic aversion to Jeffersonian approval based upon Locke, reflected the piecemeal formation of internal Leviathans that made democracy possible. Plato’s polemical attack in the Republic against democracy as an ideology suited for morally relativistic pigs made sense given the amorality of those around him who ignored philosophic truth and diffidently sentenced Socrates to death. His opposition to democracy reflected the observable reality of Hobbes’s first law of nature, namely an avaricious Tony Montana attitude commonly held towards other individuals and groups at that time. Democracy only became a viable alternative to absolute sovereignty after the humble and prudential values diffused by the burgeoning bourgeoisie of Locke’s time attained widespread acceptance. If the hypothetical man of the state of nature is self-reliantly rational and reasonable rather than nasty and brutish, we can entrust him with freedom without risking our security from death.

The American middle class is often derisively mocked at my University for the values its members hold dear. Their sexual abstention, proudly traditional religiosity, and lowly aspirations for a quiet life of monetary gain with a nuclear family strike many supposed “free spirits” as an archaic edifice to topple. The eternal Hobbesian preeminence of security within us, however, makes it wiser to consider the utilitarian importance of their self-restraint for the preservation of any freedom at all.
(less)

like 1 like

· see review

Jul 20, 2010

Jeremy added it · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, politics

It's not hard to see why this is considered so important. He goes one step beyond Machiavelli and just totally blows apart the last remaining shreds of virtue-derived political praxis. Politics no longer has anything to do with the idea of 'the good,' what we have now is a secular system in which we consent to have rulers to protect our own interests, however noble or terrible they may be, because without that framework we'd just live like animals, fighting absolutely everything else in the worl...more

like 2 likes

· see review

Jun 10, 2007

Alex rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy

hobbes' theory is a misanthropic, elitist vision that humans are basically corrupt, evil and stupid, and must be lead by a far-sighted guardian or "leviathan" which enforces private property relations and prevents people from following their "evil impulses."

yikes.

like 2 likes

· see review

Aug 23, 2011

Brian rated it

· review of another edition

A great foundational political philosophy text. Hobbes touches on humans as a starting point for government: monarchy vs. aristocracy vs. democracy (he sure loves his absolute monarchy), liberty, crime and punishment (the only reason for punishment is deterrence). He then takes on religious issues, though these are abridged in this edition. He constantly decries superstition and believing people who claim special knowledge of God, and he goes through the books of the Bible describing how none...more

like

· see review

Aug 30, 2011

Matt rated it

Leviathan is Hobbes’ metaphor for the State.

According to Hobbes, the use of speech has four abuses. The second of which is when men “use words metaphorically, that is, in other sense than that they are ordained for, and therby deceive others.” Bk. 1, Ch. IV, pg. 17.

I’ll come back to this.

Hobbes is best known for his -life is short and brutish- quip which is a good summary of his first book. He does not hide his disdain for the Greek philosophers adopted by ...moreLeviathan is Hobbes’ metaphor for the State.

According to Hobbes, the use of speech has four abuses. The second of which is when men “use words metaphorically, that is, in other sense than that they are ordained for, and therby deceive others.” Bk. 1, Ch. IV, pg. 17.

I’ll come back to this.

Hobbes is best known for his -life is short and brutish- quip which is a good summary of his first book. He does not hide his disdain for the Greek philosophers adopted by the church Schoolmen that came before him. However, the approach to his own political philosophy is simultaneously an imitation of, and rejection of, those same Greeks. Like Aristotle, Hobbes believes in the Euclidean process of defining terms which, when used logically, will then unambiguously reach to solid conclusions. Unlike Plato‘s The Republic, Aristotle‘s Politics or even Machiavelli’s The Prince, Hobbes makes no attempt, initially, to establish a State around some defined good. The State exists because men fear the state of nature in which all are at war with each other. The sovereign is a tool of those governed. The sovereign's empowered to help avoid utter chaos. All are bound to the sovereign because the sovereign is the expression of their will. And their will is a double-negative version of the Golden Rule- do not do unto others what you don’t want done to you. The values men have in a state of nature are given as inherent truths. Hobbes lists them off with a brief statement as to why with no debate. For example, “Riches are honorable, for they are power. Poverty, dishonourable.” Bk. 1, Ch. X, pg. 53. Again, the focus is on what men are like in a state of nature, not an attempt to create new values.

Most people focus on the first book, but there are three others. The second book comprises mechanisms for the State. it’s not terribly engaging as it lays out reasons why monarchy is best the system of government and elaborates on the ways to avoid civil strife.

Then religion comes into play and the entire book loses cohesion. Any suspicions I had the Hobbes was an atheist were obliterated with the third book. Page after page of scathing criticism of the Church culminates in Hobbes’ reinterpretation of Scripture that:

The laws of God, therefore, are none but the laws of nature, whereof the principal is that we should not violate our faith, that is, a commandment to obey our civil sovereigns, which we constituted over us by mutual pact with another. Bk. 3, Ch. XLIII, pg. 399.

Hobbes does not follow through with the idea of savage men bonding together in a social contract on their own terms to avoid living in a state of fear. No, Hobbes is really talking about Christians bonding together to enforce biblical commandments. The State and Christianity combine into one sovereign over the Commonwealth.

Overall, the first book is fascinating in its raw vision of humanity. The later chapters soften that image until Hobbes becomes nothing more than a theological reformer. The imagery of a monster State ruling over its subjects is not the image Hobbes is after. The subtle Christian reference to the Leviathan (Job 41) becomes clearer by the end of the book. His metaphor deceived me.(less)

like

· see review

Aug 05, 2007

Moses Allen rated it

Recommends it for: the philosophic or political mind

Shelves: philosophy

This is a difficult read because it was written in the seventeenth century, but book XIII is probably the most important part. I would even go so far as to say you could read only the introduction and books X-XIV and get best of the book.

like 2 likes

· see review

May 21, 2009

Juan Pablo rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: partially-read

Otro libro leído sólo parcialmente...
Hobbes es bastante duro al referirse al estado natural del hombre, ´como es sabido. De una forma para nada optimista, es enfático en decir que originariamente todo hombre está en guerra con los demás, buscamos imponernos violentamente para lograr que los demás nos consideren a la misma altura que nosotros mismo, y que por lo tanto estamos sumidos en un ambiente incivilizado en el que la vida es “solitaria, pobre, desgraciada, brutal y corta.”

...more

like

· see review

Feb 17, 2009

Gina rated it

· review of another edition

hobbes is the author of political dictatorship and monarchy. having been returned politically to a hobbesian state during the last us presidency, i found this book incredibly informative about the nature of surrender. Hobbes' state of nature is defined primarily by the constant fear of death and engagements of war. By acknowledging a "Leviathan" (sea monster, figure head) a state of relative peace is gained. The social contract states that in trade for protection from each other, w...more

like

· see review

Dec 10, 2008

eesenor rated it

· review of another edition

Hobbes proposes that each individual is motivated by selfishness, and devises a political body that would exist to prevent a war of all against all.

like 1 like

· see review

Nov 02, 2011

Xon rated it

· review of another edition

An epic tome about political philosophy--at least that's what I have heard said about the book by enlightened intellectuals.

I read this a while ago, so same here, I should have to reread to give it a fair review.

Nonetheless, it is as the enlightened intellectuals posit: a great work on political philosophy. A lot of where we are in the western cultures today, politically, culturally, philosophically, comes from Hobbe's erudite treatise.

This is no Sunday after...more

like

· see review

Nov 21, 2010

Andrew added it · review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, 16c-17c-nonfiction

Over the years, the idea of Thomas Hobbes has become far more important than Hobbes himself. We all know his line about the state of nature-- "nasty, brutish, and short"-- that can be applied to high school wrestlers as easily as it can to his proto-Enlightenment convictions about primitive man.

But that's the thing, we all know it. And when we hear his shitty, absurdly baroque argument, we like it even less. To a modern reader, Hobbes is his own worst enemy. If you have a...more

like 1 like

· see review

Nov 09, 2011

Koba St. rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: law-school

Ne visą skaičiau, nes politikai tereikėjo dalies (135-347 puslapiai). Pradžioje skaitėsi įdomiai ir lengvai - parašyta labai geru stiliumi, bet ilgainiui pradėjau nesutikti su Hobbes'o idėjomis apie suvereno sudievinimą, jo absoliutų teisingumą ir apie draudimą protestuoti prieš aukščiausią valdžią, juo labiau ją nuversti ar bent jau pakeisti valdymo formą. Dar vienas trūkumas - tas Leviatano statymas, valstybės ypatumus paverčiant metaforomis apie žmogaus kūną - atrodė vaikiškai ir nerimtai.
...more

like

· see review

Sep 15, 2011

Anu Harchu rated it

· review of another edition

Recommends it for: Everyone

Recommended to Anu by: My International Relations Professor

Shelves: favorites

I had been appointed to do a presentation on Thomas Hobbes, and the funny thing is that I had to read this freaking over 700-page book in less than a week. But still I ended up really enjoying it; plus the presentation went well, I think…

The whole work consists of 4 books on different matters:
- Book One: Of Men
- Book Two: Of Commonwealth
- Book Three: Of Christian Commonwealth
- Book Four: Of the Kingdom of Darkness

All the books were really interesti...more

like

· see review

Mar 27, 2011

Catherine rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: 2011, england, work, law

I'm glad i read this - glad to have spent some time exploring the nuances of what the social contract is, was, and could be. However Hobbes is a little like that first-year student who, when told that he/she should properly define his/her terms in a paper takes the exercise to its furthest extreme and qualifies everything with a definition from Webster's. Was it really necessary to define how a human smells things and taste things in order to persuade the reader that absolute monarchy perhaps ...more

like

· see review

Mar 19, 2007

naomi rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: reviewedbooks

this book is the shit.

like 1 like

· see review

Dec 13, 2008

Michael rated it

· review of another edition

I read (and assigned) this book along with 10 students cover to cover in 2 months. It is amazing how much detail Hobbes goes into and how much most people misunderstand Hobbes. The amount of Scripture he utilises is phenomenal (all to support his political theology), and the fact that half of this book is about religion is just plain surprising, given his reputation as an atheist. I have a profoundly new view of Hobbes now and think this book is well worth reading closely, preferably in a group ...more

like 1 like

· see review

Jul 23, 2011

Yann rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: renaissance, philosophie, angleterre

Le Leviathan est un livre remarquable. Écrit par un Anglais au beau milieu du dix-septième siècle, alors qu'en France la Fronde secoue la paix du royaume, que l'Angleterre est également la proie de troubles, et qu'enfin l'Europe est encore meurtrie par les guerres de religion, cet ouvrage a pour ambition de tracer nettement la frontière entre les prérogatives de la Religion chrétienne et celles de l’État, quand à l'usage des lois, et de la force pour les faire respecter. Hobbes peut être compté ...more

like

· see review

Jun 26, 2011

Marts (Thinker) rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: philosophy, classics, politics

Thomas Hobbes discourse on civil and ecclesiatical governance, he analyses this in four parts, firstly via a discourse of man and the first principles of society; secondly he looks at the institution of a commonwealth and varying principles governing such, as here listed:
"The sovereign has twelve principal rights:

1. because a successive covenant cannot override a prior one, the subjects cannot (lawfully) change the form of government.

2. because the covenant f...more

like 5 likes

· see review

Oct 15, 2010

Jill rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: personal-pursuits-in-education

I really learned a lot when I came to the section on the Kingdome of Christianity, there were ideas and facts that Hobbes correlated that I had never considered before and I appreciated his insights. However. His views about life as we live it and how the ideal commonwealth ought to look like are infuriating. He supports an absolute monarch with all the citizens completely giving power and life to their king. Anyone who doesn't want to join their group is naturally still ungoverned and there...more

like

· see review

Feb 10, 2011

Adam rated it

· review of another edition

Shelves: 1500-s-1700-s, philosophy

I had rated this one star, which, on rereading much of it, is both stupid and sort of cute, in that just a year ago I was all indignantly opposed to Hobbes as many are, not because of his stature as a philosopher, not because of his arguments, but solely because of his conclusions, and not even really his conclusions, but my own socially and politically biased take on his conclusions. That I read a 700+ page book with so much goddamn bias and learned so little is not really surprising, but it is...moreI had rated this one star, which, on rereading much of it, is both stupid and sort of cute, in that just a year ago I was all indignantly opposed to Hobbes as many are, not because of his stature as a philosopher, not because of his arguments, but solely because of his conclusions, and not even really his conclusions, but my own socially and politically biased take on his conclusions. That I read a 700+ page book with so much goddamn bias and learned so little is not really surprising, but it is scary as all fuck.

Hobbes' ethics is brilliant, and we owe Hobbes a great debt for his innovation and the importance of his work here. Leviathan is more than that, though; it's really mostly a very, very good work of philosophy that leads, due probably to some majorly costly macro-level mistakes and simplifications, and due to Hobbes' preexisting biases, to some bad conclusions (on a broader level than the standard 'but dude, he's like totally dissing democracy' objection...). But there's nothing wrong with Hobbes' views generally. Generally speaking, I think Hobbes is pretty spot-on re: human nature, re: the social contract etc. etc.

Considering the fact that this is inevitably seriously dated and ought to be read as such, Leviathan is actually consistently interesting and thought-provoking, even in its most tedious sections, and I'm not even sure that an international Hobbesian state wouldn't work, as much as I am generally committed to Liberalism (in the philosophical sense).

The fact that this book has gone from seriously ugly and off-putting to spotty brilliance in my estimation in just over a year and a half seriously has me questioning whether or not I have any real convictions. Maybe, most probably, I am just less ideologically biased than I was when I first read this, and less inclined to the warm-and-fuzzies-for-the-sake-of-the-warm-and-fuzzies.

A seriously important book, and a seriously good work of philosophy, too, making the required adjustments for period etc. Hobbes maybe has claim to the chair of first great modern philosopher, as I think we have much more use for him than for Descartes, in spite of the latter's unwavering pack of rabid groupies. The just-slightly-later-on Spinoza and Leibniz surely trounce both Hobbes and Descartes in terms of lasting relevance and importance and greatness, though.(less)

like

· see review

title link	preview: Leviathan: With Selected Variants from the Latin Edition of 1668
avg rating	preview: Leviathan: With Selected Variants from the Latin Edition of 1668 Goodreads rating: 3.47 (4506 ratings)
small image	preview: click here [close]
med image	preview: click here [close]
BBCode	[url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16609.Leviathan?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book][img]http://photo.goodreads.com/books/1166733598m/16609.jpg[/img][/url] [url=http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/16609.Leviathan?utm_medium=api&utm_source=blog_book]Leviathan: With Selected Variants from the Latin Edition of 1668 by Thomas Hobbes[/url]

Leviathan: With Selected Variants from the Latin Edition of 1668

Friend Reviews

Lists with This Book

Community Reviews

new topic
Discuss This Book

combine
Other Editions (122)

Genres

Readers Also Enjoyed

About Thomas Hobbes

Books by Thomas Hobbes

Share This Book

Share This Book on Your Website

Trivia About Leviathan

Quotes from Leviathan

Groups That Shelved Leviathan