Hobbes’ Materialism religion is portrayed as distinctly similar to Descartes’ in the sense that there is the staunch belief of a supreme being in existence. Descartes suggested that philosophy and material substance mattered as demonstrated by motion whereby an entity’s existence was only based on motion. Descartes had the belief that the earth was formed by a supreme entity, God, who assumed his place as the creator and watched the creation thriving and running dynamically and independently without any supernatural influence (Rogers 1988).
Hobbes, on the other hand, had his faith in the existence of extraterrestrial bodies which were in constant motion over the face of the earth. Hobbes also believed that all motion originated from within entities of matter. He concluded that God also belonged to the material forms of the world since he was not to be identified with motion.
Hobbes hence offered substantial resistance to the absolute existence of God. He also vehemently insisted in the consecutive transformative cycle in dynamic matter whereby metaphysical elements including motion and matter could be reduced or aggregated in the long run. Furthermore, Hobbes argued that the combination of matter and motion brought about the existence of life (Lloyd 1988).
These reviews on their communicational benefits of the two religious concepts displayed the coexistence ability of both materialism and the belief in a God in the global perspective. The two philosophers however, did not always agree on varying issues which were mostly involving religious philosophical perspectives based by their ways and views of life.
Human Desire in Materialism and belief in God
Hobbes initially perceived that human kind and i...
... middle of paper ...
...ture books are collections from earlier sources.
Secondly, critics claimed Hobbes’ idea of the trinity consisted of Jesus, the apostles and Moses.
Hobbes also suggested that rarely have miracles occurred after the Testamental era. He remarked that no individual deserved the title ‘martyr’ with the exception of those who were present at the occurrence of Jesus’ ascension. Hobbes added that he had the conviction that witchcraft is superstitious and heaven was a delusional belief.
He further stated that religion was so mangled by superstition that the two entities had subsequently become indistinguishable from each other. As it could be seen throughout his concept formulations, Hobbes was ultimately advocating for the implementation of his Leviathan dictates as the supreme civil authority in Church foundation governments, their religion and doctrines (Lloyd 1992).
I believe he would start out with talking about being deceived, that regardless of Hobbes’s belief that he knows when we are awake, there could be an evil demon that be deceiving Hobbes. Descartes would probably discredit Hobbes’s statement that he is able to have more concrete, recurring thoughts while he is awake, unlike when he is asleep. But Descartes says that he has had dreams where he is doing the exact same thing asleep as he does while he is “awake”. Even Hobbes has experienced this, but some cannot relate to this. Even so where are Hobbes concrete lacks fact that make him certain that he knows when he is awake and asleep, he claims that he has “faith” that he is satisfied with this. But Descartes doesn 't seem like he really has thought threw all the opposing ideas and he disregards his own evidence of a perfect being. Descartes rebuttal is becoming less and less
As the centuries went on, philosophy, just like many other things, became much more secular. That being said, Schmitt made it very clear in “The Problem of Sovereignty” that “In political reality”, sovereigns no longer act under the idea of natural law (Schmitt 17). Later on in this same chapter, Schmitt discusses how Hobbes would not understand the idea of superior and inferior because Hobbes believes anyone who has power is subject to the other. However, when Hobbes was writing much earlier, the idea of natural law was still a very prominent concept in philosophy and therefore Hobbes believed that even the absolute sovereign was subject to the laws of nature which he clearly states in “Of Civil Laws” when he says the laws the sovereign makes “be not against the law of nature (which is undoubtedly God’s law)” (Hobbes
His first assumption is that people are physically and mentally similar to one another, and this similarity means that “no individual has the capacity to overpower or influence another” (Hobbes). A flaw, however, that I realize in this assertion is that there do exist in society persons of deficient physical and mental ability. For example, people with severe physical or mental handicaps would not fare well in Hobbes’ state of nature because they would be easily dominated. Hobbes’ second assumption is that people generally want to protect their own lives, “shun[ning] death” (Hobbes). This proclivity for self-preservation does not translate to an innate malevolent nature of humans; however, it does imply that humans tend to be more indifferent towards each other than benevolent. I tend to agree with this second assumption because in my experience, individuals think of themselves in an elevated manner, and if someone does not agree with this view, the individual becomes offended. Individuals tend to judge others based on swift observations, dismissing others if they do not align with one’s personal preferences. The final assumption Hobbes asserts is that individuals have a penchant for religion. This penchant stems from the curious and anxious nature of individuals. Hobbes thinks that these aspects of human nature cause individuals to “seek out religious beliefs” (Hobbes) in order to quell the curiosity and anxiety that dominates their lives. In addition to these various normative assumptions regarding the state of nature, Hobbes outlines the right of nature, which is “a liberty right to preserve the individual in the state of nature” (Hobbes). In essence, this
The basic principles of Deism state that there is a divine Creator, whom one might call God, who created the universe. However, it is believed that after creating the universe, this divine being stopped interfering with earthly affairs and left the universe to work according to the laws of nature. According to Deists, knowledge of this Creator and the laws of nature can be acquired through human reason. Additionally, Deists rejected miracles and believed that Jesus was merely a great preacher rather than the son of God, as neither of these ideas followed the logic of reason. This emphasis on reason and natural law appears as the direct influence of the Enlightenment on Deism, connecting the two systems of thought. Some of the Enlightenment philosophy that influenced the creation of Deist doctrine can be seen in Enlightenment philosophers ' works such as Thomas Hobbes ' Leviathan. Within the section on The Artificial Man, Hobbes states that "life is but a motion of limbs...For what is the heart but a spring...and the joints but so many wheels, giving motion to the whole body such as was intended by the artificer" (Hobbes). By referring to the body and world in such a mechanical way, it seems that this philosopher is stating that the Creator, or "artificer", has
Hobbes’ theory on the condition of the state of nature, and government are not only more applicable today but his reasoning is far sounder than that of Rousseau. These concepts were significantly conditionally reliant. What Hobbes imagined was not a pre-societal period, rather he ...
...g, the exchange was still worthy of discussion because it provided an empirical examples of the catastrophic consequences of ignoring rational principles. Hobbes recognized this same tendency for some to act irrational. He stated that “…men’s actions proceed from their wills and their wills from their hopes and fears…” (Hobbes, page 69). Much like a gambler at a casino who knows that odds are heavily in favor of the house, each man’s hope drives their will toward irrational acts. Examples provided by these misguided souls serve the common good, by quelling the hopes of the masses that they somehow will achieve the unachievable. Whether it’s the collapse of an empire in Greece or the squandering of a paycheck at a card table, these products of irrational behavior cause the remainder of the populace to solidify their commitment of being a rational part of society.
Hobbes, T. (1839-45) The English Works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury; Now First Collected and Edited by Sir William Molesworth, Bart. Vol. 3. Leviathan. London: Bohn. Accessed via: http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/hobbes-the-english-works-vol-iii-leviathan
Whereas Hobbes would want to advance a proposition of relativity between politics and religion, his argument on morality violates the fundamental tenets of ethics and duty based virtues. For instance, the moral maxim adopted by other philosophers champions a universal viewpoint that dissociates morality from acts of untruthfulness. However, Hobbes’s beliefs regarding the close association of religion and politics do not satisfy the principal requirement of morality as an aspect of relativism (Pojman and Vaughn
...re than detections made by the body of particular bodies going about their particular motions. Descartes attempts to draw things away from the body; Descartes’ focus on certainty lead him toward dualism, as he argues that senses are deceiving. For Cartesian Dualism, this is perfectly operable; the deception of the senses to the mind may occur because of some disconnect. Additionally, Hobbes and materialism could be correct in this case, as all thought relates back to sense. In the sixteen hundreds, dualism may have been the more viable theory; however, in today’s day and age, materialism offers a simpler explanation regarding the problems of mind-body interaction and thought. Hobbes clearly outlines a very basic idea of materialism before modern materialist theories such as functionalism come to be.
from Motion, tries to prove the existence of God as the first mover which is unmoved.
Thomas Hobbes and John Locke were two English philosophers who were very similar thinkers. They both studies at Oxford, and they both witnessed the civil Revolution. The time when they lived in England influenced both of their thoughts as the people were split into two groups, those whom though the king should have absolute power, and the other half whom thought people could govern themselves. However Hobbes and Locke both rejected the idea of divine right, such as there was no one person who had the right from God to rule. They both believed in the dangers of state of nature, they thought without a government there is more chance of war between men. However their theories differ, Hobbes theories are based on his hypothetical ideas of the state
Thomas Hobbes and John Stuart Mill have completely differing views on affairs consisting of liberty and authority. Hobbes believing that man is inherently unable to govern themselves and emphasizes that all people are selfish and evil; the lack of governmental structure is what results in a state of chaos, only to be resolved by an authority figure, leading him to be in favor of authority. Throughout “On Liberty” Mill believes that authority, used to subvert one’s liberty, is only acceptable in protecting one from harm. In Leviathan Hobbes uses the Leviathan as a metaphor for the state, made up of its inhabitants, with the head of the Leviathan being the sovereign and having sovereignty as the soul of the Leviathan. Hobbes’ believes that man needs the absolute direction of the sovereign for society to properly function, deeming liberty practically irrelevant due to authority, as the government’s power is the only thing that allows society to go anywhere. The views that Mill has on liberty are not simply more applicable in modern and ancient society, but the outcome of his views are far more beneficial on society as a whole compared to Hobbes’ who’s views are far too black and white to be applied in outside of a theoretical situation and would not truly work in real world scenarios.
Hobbes, on the other hand argues that justice is needed for people to live together in civil society. He outlines this idea down to human beings in the
Hobbes was a strong believer in the thought that human nature was evil. He believed that “only the unlimited power of a sovereign could contain human passions that disrupt the social order and threatened civilized life.” Hobbes believed that human nature was a force that would lead to a constant state of war if it was not controlled. In his work the Leviathan, he laid out a secular political statement in which he stated the significance of absolutism.
When first looking at the relationship between philosophy and religion, I found it easier to explain the differences rather than the similarities. I began this paper the same way I do others. This generally involves a profound amount of research on the topic at hand. However, in contrast to the other papers I have done, the definitions of philosophy and religion only raised more questions for me. It was fascinating how the explanations differed dramatically from author to author.