The basis of Leviathan relies upon a theoretical readjustment of the state of social affairs. Candide, on the other hand, is that state of social affairs. Whereas Hobbes's Leviathan relates that of how the state of human nature can be changed and adapted to a desirable social order, Voltaire's Candide shows the difficulty of being within the sorry state of the human experience. But where does the concept of personal freedom come into play within these two basic premises? And how can a person compare such highly different interpretations of the spectrum of personal experience?
Hobbes has presented to the reader a geometric and organized map of an ideal governing situation. Man is a product of nature. But the interpretation of nature is purely a social construction. Nature is what it is; yet man, through his own filter of subjectivity, creates his own understanding of nature and its universal purpose. So the concept of truth in nature is hardly truth at all, but merely a creation of man so that he can understand the incomprehensible. Then what exactly is the truth of man's existence? To put it plainly, man has little power over nature. This causes the life of man to be, in Hobbes's own words, "nasty, brutish, and short." Fundamentally, in man's "natural condition of mankind" there is a constant, mechanical search for sustenance- food, housing, and power. Man is put in a situation of constant battle of wills in order to survive. In Hobbes's terms this is the State of Nature. Man needs to escape this state, and Hobbes offers a theoretically viable solution. By accepting the basic Law of Nature (the right of self-preservation) man hereby accepts a social contract. The contract generally provides man with peace, and ...
... middle of paper ...
...e process of searching for personal freedom. Man, according to both Voltaire and Hobbes, is inherently evil. And there must be some solution of how to repress this but at the same time allow for the mobility of a government's subjects. Leviathan attempts to allow this, although there are some undeniable flaws that could consequently mar the makeup of the monarchical government. And Candide shows how man acts in the State of Nature. It is not unlike a cry for help from Voltaire. He is implying that there needs to be some sort of social change to alleviate the injustices done to human beings. Yet, is the Leviathan really the answer? Perhaps, but staying optimistic within the belly of the beast may be hard to do.
Works Cited
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. W.W. Norton and Company. New York. 1997.
Voltaire. Candide. W.W. Norton and Company. New York. 1991.
The foremost aspects to consider from the Leviathan are Hobbes’s views on human nature, what the state of nature consists of, and what role morality plays. Hobbes assumes, taking the position of a scientist, that humans are “bodies in motion.” In other words, simple mechanical existences motivated solely to gain sati...
...reflected critically on the events of his life—even just the two examples used in this essay--, he would probably find that this is not the best of all possible worlds as it is rife with evil and suffering. With this novella, Voltaire made the point that some spend a lifetime justifying—not rationalizing—the events of the world because those same people are too busy attempting to prove one theory rather than develop others that may fit reality more. When Candide dismisses Pangloss at the end of the novella by saying, “Let us cultivate our garden,” he is rejecting Pangloss’ philosophy, turning over a new leaf, and taking charge of his own life and giving it its own meaning free of Pangloss’ influence.
Although Hobbes is a liberal thinker in some respects his ideas presented in the Leviathan resemble that of a monarchy. Hobbes asserts that the commonwealth can fall under three types of regimes “when the representative is one man, then it is the commonwealth a monarchy... assembly of all... a democracy... assembly of a part only... aristocracy” (L 19.1). However despite this, Hobbes proclaims that monarchic rule is superior since “the private interest is the same with the public” (L19.4). Hobbes posits that people within the state of nature require a Leviathan in order to rein since the state of nature is anarchic. He proposes that by forming a sovereign, the people must trade their innate and natural rights for safety and peace within the state otherwise they would have to submit to a life of “continual fear and danger of [a] violent death...solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short” (L13.9). In his work Leviathan, Hobbes presents a system of government that is more of a principality than a republic in nature. However still the Leviathan does include some republican virtues. The following paragraphs will discuss Hobbes’ Leviathan and its resemblance to both republic and principality and finally conclude that the Leviathan does not differ from either governing style.
Machiavelli divides all states into principalities and republics, principalities are governed by a solitary figure and republics are ruled by a group of people. With Hobbes’ Leviathan a new model for governing a territory was introduced that can no longer be equally divided into Machiavelli's two state categories. Hobbes combines the concepts for governing principalities and republics into a new type of political thought that is similar to and different from Machiavelli. Hobbes, unlike Machiavelli, is on the side of the people and not the armed prophets. Hobbes believes that the function of society is not just merely living, but to have a safe and comfortable life. He believes that by transferring all rights to a sovereign the threat of the state of nature will be diminished. A sovereign elected will be able to represent and protect everyone equally, they are not a ruler of the people but a representative. The Leviathan differs from a principalities and a republics by establishing the institution of the commonwealth through the social contract.
However, there is very little lessening in our time, of the human scourges of war, famine, rape, avarice, persecution, bigotry, superstition, intolerance, and hypocrisy that make up this element of human corruption that is addressed in Candide. Candide still serves as an effectual whip with which to lash once again the perpetuators of this suffering. (Weitz 12) The theme of human misery is Voltaire's primary achievement in integrating philosophy and literature in Candide. (Weitz 12) "Do you think," asks Candide of Martin as they approached the coast of France,"that men have always massacred each other, as they do today that they have always been false, faithless, ungrateful, thieving, weak, inconstant, mean spirited, envious, greedy, drunken, miserly, ambitious, bloody, slanderous, debauched, fanatic, hypocritical, and stupid?". Martin replies with further question." do you think that hawks have always eaten pigeons when they could find them?" "of course I do" Candide answers. Martin responds,"well, if hawks have always had the same character, why should you suppose men have changed theirs?".
Hobbes views human nature as the war of each man against each man. For Hobbes, the essence of human nature can be found when we consider how man acts apart from any government or order. Hobbes describes the world as “a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man.” (Hobbes mp. 186) In such a world, there are “no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” (Hobbes mp. 186) Hobbes believes that laws are what regulate us from acting in the same way now. He evidences that our nature is this way by citing that we continue to lock our doors for fear of theft or harm. Hobbes gives a good argument which is in line with what we know of survivalism, and evidences his claim well. Hobbes claims that man is never happy in having company, unless that company is utterly dominated. He says, “men have no pleasure, (but on the contrary a great dea...
Self-preservation is an important factor in shaping the ideologies of Hobbes and Locke as it ties in to scarcity of resources and how each of them view man’s sate of nature. Hobbes and Locke both believe in self-preservation but how each of them get there is very different. Hobbes believes that man’s state of nature is a constant state of war because of his need to self-preserve. He believes that because of scarcity of goods, man will be forced into competition, and eventually will take what is others because of competition, greed, and his belief of scarce goods. Hobbes also states that glory attributes to man’s state of nature being a constant state of war because that drives man to go after another human or his property, on the one reason of obtaining glory even if they have enough to self preserve. Equality ties in with Hobbes view of man being driven by competition and glory because he believes that because man is equal in terms of physical and mental strength, this give them an equal cha...
The final sentence of that passage, “And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish, and short,” seems to sum up what Hobbes has been leading up to in the first twelve chapters of Leviathan: that without a sovereign power, without Leviathan, the natural life of man is simply horrible. It is a life in which people naturally and constantly seek to destroy one another.
Candide is a reflection of the philosophical values of the Enlightenment. Voltaire’s novel is a satire of the Old Regime ideologies in which he critiques the political, social, and religious ideals of his time.
He argues that a state or commonwealth is where all men surrender their natural rights to the state in order to escape the state of nature where they live in perpetual fear for their life. I agree with this because man’s primary aims are for safety and security (Hobbes, The Leviathan, Chapter 13 part 1, pg.186). The concept of government was established as a means of protection, for which individuals were prepared to submit to a greater power.
Above anything else, Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan is a creation story and an investigation of human nature. The story begins in a time of chaos and death and through a journey of human development culminates in the establishment of a sustainable and rational society—the commonwealth—led by a sovereign. At a first casual glance, Hobbes’ reasoning of the transformation from the state of nature to the commonwealth is not airtight. A few possible objections can be quickly spotted: the contradictions of natural law with suicide and the civil law to honor even harmful covenants. Hobbes deals with some of these issues and seems to ignore others, but he does address in detail the most significant objection to his theory: the unlimited and unchecked power given to the sovereign. The establishment of the commonwealth culminates in a covenant that grants the sovereign absolute power in enforcing the civil laws of the state, but also guarantees the sovereign’s status as above the law. How does this ensure peace and survival, as is the point of the commonwealth? Hobbes provides many convincing reasons why it would be difficult, counterproductive, and impossible for the sovereign to not be above the law, but in the end, disorder and chaos are worse than any tyranny.
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
In Candide, by Voltaire, Candide struggles through a world torn by constant bloodshed and crime. As he travels, he and other characters are deceived, injured, and abused by the world around him. Voltaire’s Candide reveals another side of human beings’ hearts as he portrays humanity’s hamartias as greed, lust, and religion.
Candide is an outlandishly humorous, far-fetched tale by Voltaire satirizing the optimism espoused by the philosophers of the Age of Enlightenment. It is the story of a young man’s adventures throughout the world, where he witnesses much evil and disaster. Throughout his travels, he adheres to the teachings of his tutor, Pangloss, believing that "all is for the best in the best of all possible worlds." Candide is Voltaire’s answer to what he saw as an absurd belief proposed by the Optimists - an easy way to rationalize evil and suffering. Though he was by no means a pessimist, Voltaire refused to believe that what happens is always for the best.The Age of Enlightenment is a term applied to a wide variety of ideas and advances in the fields of philosophy, science, and medicine. The primary feature of Enlightenment philosophy is the belief that people can actively work to create a better world. A spirit of social reform characterized the political ideology of Enlightenment philosophers. While Voltaire’s Candide is heavily characterized by the primary concerns of the Enlightenment, it also criticizes certain aspects of the movement. It attacks the idea that optimism, which holds that rational thought can inhibit the evils perpetrated by human beings.
The main critics of Thomas Hobbes’ work are most often those with a more optimistic view of human nature. However, if one is to really look at a man’s actions in depth, a self-serving motivation can always be found. The main problem with Hobbes’ claims is that he does not account for the more Darwinian perspective that helping one’s own species survive is at the same time a selfish and unwar-like act. Thus his conclusion that without a governing body, we are essentially at war with one another is not completely true as years of evolution can help disprove.