1. Hobbes says (Leviathan, I,13) that "I
put for a general inclination of all mankind a perpetual and restless desire of
power after power, that ceaseth only in death." Is this like Machiavelli's
notion that men are naturally greedy, or Luther's that few are really
Christians? What role does this judgment about people play in Hobbes' theory?
According to Hobbes, man seeks to
increase his power indefinitely “I put for a general inclination of all mankind
a perpetual and restless desire of power after power” and this desire “ceaseth
only in death”. In fact, man is always seeking more wealth and thus succeeding
to acquire something new only fuels his desire to gain more.
Moreover, men are envious and
always aim to distinguish themselves. In a world of conflict, only power can
ensure this double satisfaction: That which comes from acquiring goods (Felicity)
and the distinction that comes with climbing the social hierarchy (Distinction).
Men also do not seek ephemeral and
instantaneous happiness but rather think of the future and aim at ensuring that
this “felicity” be perpetual throughout the rest of their lives. Thus, this
endless seeking of power does not only aim at achieving a higher level of happiness
but rather results from the desire to make sure that a certain degree of
felicity be guaranteed in the days to come.
It aims to protect one’s wealth against the assaults of the other and
this need for protection requires an ever increasing level of power. Hence, not
only is the search for more power infinite, power actually increases as it is exercised.
Thus, unlike Machiavelli’s traditional
notion of greediness (Men want more fortune), Hobbes claims that men are not
seeking wealth but are rather seeking power to ensure felicity (including
wealth).
This understanding of the power
mechanism illustrated by Hobbes logically leads to his argument about the need
for a sovereign to whom all individuals need to seed their power. Otherwise,
all men will attempt to become more powerful than others which ultimately leads
to confrontation and conflict.
I agree with Rostom, but I think the underlying definitions of man that Hobbes was addressing are much the same ones present in Luther and Machiavelli's treatises. Hobbes describes the inherent vice that almost all people carry--a ceaseless, headstrong avarice that can defy morals and religion and lurks beneath the surface. This greed manifests itself in Hobbes as a trait with "restless desire" for power and felicity, but it is much the same one that drives men to grasp for power in Machiavelli. It is the same greed that causes them to pursue success without regard to casualties, and for citizens to throw out rulers when their allegiance changes on a whim. Again, it is the same trait that pervades the pseudo-Christians that Luther describes, who are religious only for convenience and appearance. These are the Christians that act through active righteousness and indulgences, but are only religious for greed.
ReplyDelete