Thomas Hobbes: What Is Our True Identity?

1414 Words3 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: Thomas hobbes view about human nature

What is our true identity?
Whether human nature is fundamentally selfish or altruistic is a question that challenge lots of researchers back in the time, and even today. Some people, such as Thomas Hobbes, claimed that man 's nature is basically evil and selfish. However, Joseph Butler, a philosopher, disagreed with this idea. For him, goodness consists in having what he calls the ‘principle of reflection’ govern and control our passions. People always want to know the true, but there is no answer for this question, so we have to find it out base on our knowledge and beliefs. It is important to know what is our true identity when we were born. In my mind, no one is perfect, everyone has the dark-side in themselves. People cannot deny that there is no mistake have …show more content…

Thomas Hobbes is one of these people support this idea. Hobbes, in the book Leviathan, suggests that human beings are primarily selfish since they are driven by their passions (appetites and fears) and that what is good is nothing but the satisfaction of one’s passions, which is often attained when reason is employed merely as a tool or as an instrument to satisfy our passions. To support his claim, the classic game theory match-up known as the Prisoner 's Dilemma, is show the selfish strategies in human. When playing this game, if both players cooperate, they both receive an equal payoff. But if one cooperates and the other does not, the cooperating player receives the smallest possible payoff, and the defecting player the largest. If both players do not cooperate, they both receive a payoff, but it is less than what they would gain if both had cooperated. In general it pays to cooperate, but it can pay even more to be selfish. (express.co.uk.) However, the experiment claims that when they give more time, the player will be more selfish. It is doesn’t mean that human born selfish because they have lots of time to think, and chose what’s best for them. How about let them make a

Show More
Related

  • Thomas Hobbes Little Bird Analysis

    499 Words  | 1 Pages

    One such theorist is Thomas Hobbes. Hobbes believed humans were naturally corrupt, and in his book Leviathan, he states, "For the laws of nature (as justice, equity, modesty, mercy, and, in sum, doing to others as we would be done to) of themselves, without the terror of some power, to cause them to be observed, are contrary to our natural passions, that carry us to partiality, pride, revenge and the like.” (3). Humans have a false sense of justice and mercy, yet they are truly motivated by man’s selfish ways. Thomas Hobbes believed that life was never intended to be perfect, infact it was a naturally imperfect hardship we were meant to endure: “Life is nasty, brutish, and short” (63). Humans were never intended to be perfect because nature isn’t perfect. Modern man has gone too far in his quest for perfection, and as a result is left corrupt and

    Read More

  • An Analysis of Matt Ridley’s The Origins of Virtue

    968 Words  | 2 Pages

    Upon making an honest and accurate assessment of his character, it seems evident that man is not such a creature divinely set apart from the trappings of selfishness and immorality. Rather than put man at either extreme, it seems more accurate to describe man as a creature whose tendency is to look out for himself first, as a means of survival. It is true that on many levels humans act in a cooperative way to benefit all -- but does that warrant a claim that man is genetically altruistic? Perhaps the reasoning behind his actions would lead to another view? As Ridley examines man's dependency upon others in his species, it becomes apparent that man is not necessarily a savage beast out to do everyone in, but rather a lone creature trying to ensure his survival.

    Read More

  • Political Freedom: Arendt and de Tocqueville

    1450 Words  | 3 Pages

    Selfishness blights the germ of all virtue; individualism, at first, only saps the virtue of public life; but, in the long run, it attacks and destroys all others, and is at length absorbed in downright selfishness.

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes Human Nature Analysis

    385 Words  | 1 Pages

    Human nature, according to Thomas Hobbes, is a base and narrow kind of nature. In Leviathan he argues from a mental absolutist standpoint: an absolute ruler is the best form of government, although not in response to a Godly proclamation. In his opinion, it is the only form of rule which uses human kind’s totally self-interested nature to its advantage, and shows benefit to the people. Giving up certain liberties for the sake of safety while living at the whim of an absolute ruler may sound absurd these days. However, in this kind of society, Hobbes believed, the rational course of action is for the citizens to act peacefully with each other. In class we discussed the similarities to the mafia. In this society, live peacefully and don’t

    Read More

  • Mengzi Research Paper

    669 Words  | 2 Pages

    Is human nature fundamentally good or bad? Mengzi argues for the instinctive goodness of human nature; however, admits our inherent goodness must be encouraged through propriety.

    Read More

  • Hobbes's Theory Of Political Nature And The Theories Of Human Nature

    1286 Words  | 3 Pages

    Theories of human nature, as the term would ever so subtly suggest, are at best only individual assertions of the fundamental and intrinsic compositions of mankind, and should be taken as such. Indeed it can be said that these assertions are both many and widespread, and yet too it can be said that there are a select few assertions of the nature of man that rise above others when measured by historical persistence, renown, and overall applicability. These eclectic discourses on the true nature of man have often figured largely in theories of political science, typically functioning as foundational structures to broader claims and arguments. The diversification of these ideological assertions, then, would explain the existence of varying theories

    Read More

  • Examples Of Selfishness In The Great Gatsby

    1173 Words  | 3 Pages

    Selfishness is a disease of the soul that every person experiences several times throughout their life. To say that it has never been experienced would be hypocrisy. To say that it is a “good thing”, would be erroneous. Although as humans we like to lie to ourselves, it is no question that selfishness can make any person act like a fool. It consumes us and makes us into someone we are not. Whether it leads to getting people killed, falling in love, or buying alcohol, selfishness always leads to destruction.

    Read More

  • Lord Of The Flies Thomas Hobbes State Of Nature

    402 Words  | 1 Pages

    Philosopher Thomas Hobbes had a specific opinion of the topic, state of nature. He knew no good came from people when in a wild state, and that government meant stability. Jack clearly represents that theme is the book, “The Lord of the Flies”. Once people were introduced into a state of nature, there would be fights and war, as well as the strong vs. weak battle. While Many other characters could represent Hobbes’ theory of government and state of nature, the boy that most represents Hobbes is Jack from Goulding book, “The Lord of the Flies,” because Jack understood in his own way how he must act with force and war to enforce a government.

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes Chapter 6 Summary

    557 Words  | 2 Pages

    The main idea of chapter six is about the Social Contract Theory and the perspectives of a couple important people who helped develop it. Thomas Hobbes was a philosopher who believed that morality does not depend on God, natural purpose, or altruism. His main belief is that morality is, "...the solution to a practical problem that arises for self-interested human beings." Moreover, Hobbes believed that if there was no way to enforce social rules then everyone would do as they please, he called this "the state of nature." According to him, this would be destructive for society because of four basic facts about human life. These basic facts are that there is no equality of need, there is scarcity, there is the essential equality of human power, and there is limited altruism. In simplicity, everyone wants these basic things but there's not enough to go around; this puts the society in a "constant state of war." Hobbes states that if we want to escape from the state of nature, we have to find a way to work together. In order to establish a successful society, everyone must abide by a certain set of rules and someone must enforce them. Hobbes calls this "the social contract," the contracts allows people to care for one another instead of being in a constant state of nature; this is possible because it allows us to be released from "the constant fear of violent death."

    Read More

  • Free Essays - Human Nature in Hamlet

    592 Words  | 2 Pages

    The play, Hamlet, by William Shakespeare, shows human nature to be greedy, self-involved and vengeful. Claudius is driven by his greed to commit murder. Polonius is always looking out for himself, currying favor at the expense of anyone in his way. Hamlet thinks only of vengeance from the moment he finds out about Claudius murdering his father. Human nature has been all of these things, but it has also evolved through the ages. We can be base and cruel, but we can also show great compassion and kindness.

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes' Ideas on Monarchy

    909 Words  | 2 Pages

    Thomas Hobbes was a proponent of the monarchal system and in this paper I will prove that Hobbes was right in supporting the monarchal system of government, I will also show the opposing school of thought, and finally, I will give you my opinion on the monarchal system. Thomas Hobbes lived from 1588-1679 and throughout most of his life there was violence going on all around him. The biggest case was the English Civil War. This war lasted about seven years and it overthrew the monarchy, which England had established many years before. After this revolution, shaky governments ruled the land for several years. But then, the English went back to the monarchal system. These times shaped Hobbes’ views and his way of thought. Hobbes became a backer of the monarchal system and expressed his thoughts through his book, Leviathan. He had several reasons that supported his zeal for monarchy. The first of which is the monarch that would be in place would look out for his people and not only for himself. Hobbes starts out by saying that if there is a thoughtful and giving monarch, he would try to encourage his people to work as hard as they possibly could. For example, if the people had to pay taxes of 10% of their total income, then the king would also get 10% of that. If the king were intelligent, he would encourage the people to work harder. This would not only increase their own personal wealth, but also that of the king’s. This may seem a bit conniving because the king is coming out of it with more money because 10% of a larger amount of total income will mean more money for the king, but the monarch is, in actuality, making lives better for the people. “Now in monarchy the private interest is th...

    Read More

  • The Causes of Altruism

    1151 Words  | 3 Pages

    Before a case can be made for the causes of altruism, altruism itself must first be defined. Most leading psychologists agree that the definition of altruism is “a motivational state with the ultimate goal of increasing another’s welfare.” (Batson, 1981). The only way for a person to be truly altruistic is if their intent is to help the community before themselves. However, the only thing humans can see is the actions themselves, and so, selfish intent may seem the same as altruistic intent. Alas, the only way that altruism can be judged is if the intent is obvious. Through that, we must conclude that only certain intents can be defined as altruistic, and as intent stemming from nature benefits the group while other intent benefits yourself, only actions caused by nature are truly altruistic.

    Read More

  • Psychological and Ethical Egoism

    1876 Words  | 4 Pages

    Psychological egoism, a descriptive claim about human nature, states that humans by nature are motivated only by self-interest. To act in one's self-interest is to act mainly for one's own good and loving what is one's own (i.e. ego, body, family, house, belongings in general). It means to give one's own interests higher priority then others'. "It (psychological egoism) claims that we cannot do other than act from self-interest motivation, so that altruism-the theory that we can and should sometimes act in favor of others' interests-is simply invalid because it's impossible" (Pojman 85). According to psychological egoists, any act no matter how altruistic it might seem, is actually motivated by some selfish desire of the agent (i.e., desire for reward, avoidance of guilt, personal happiness).

    Read More

  • Thomas Hobbes and the Realist School

    732 Words  | 2 Pages

    Different schools of thought have generated arguments since the beginning of civilization. They represent different perspectives of every part of life, whether its religion or politics. The realist school and the humanist perspectives offer people different views in many different aspects.

    Read More

  • Philosophy: Are Humans Born to be Good or Evil?

    1679 Words  | 4 Pages

    Are human beings born to be good? Or are we naturally born to be evil? A person’s nature or essence is a trait that is inherent and lasting in an individual. To be a good person is someone who thinks of others before themselves, shows kindness to one another, and makes good choices in life that can lead to a path of becoming a good moral person. To be a bad person rebels against something or someone thinking only of them and not caring about the consequences of their actions. Rousseau assumed, “that man is good by nature (as it is bequeathed to him), but good in a negative way: that is, he is not evil of his own accord and on purpose, but only in danger of being contaminated and corrupted by evil or inept guides and examples (Immanuel Kant 123).” In other words, the human is exposed to the depraved society by incompetent guardians or influences that is not of one’s free will in the view of the fact that it is passed on. My position is humans are not by nature evil. Instead, they are good but influenced by the environment and societies to act in evil ways to either harm others or themself.

    Read More

More about Thomas Hobbes: What Is Our True Identity?

Open Document