Hobbes' State of Nature: War, Rationality, and Order

Introduction: Hobbes and the State of Nature

Thomas Hobbes believes that the cruel nature of human beings causes the state of nature to be a war of all against all. To understand this claim, it is necessary to explain the difference between collective and individual rationality and how each applies to human beings in the Hobbesian state of nature. It is also important to identify the assumptions that lead Hobbes to this conclusion and to explain why he needs them. By examining these assumptions carefully, we can step outside the philosophical tradition inherited from Locke and appreciate the opposing position that Hobbes defends.

Human Nature and the War of All Against All

Of the social contract theorists, Thomas Hobbes is the most extreme in his view of human nature. He wrote a number of philosophical works, but the English Civil War, with its horrific violence, left an indelible impression upon him. In his magnum opus Leviathan, published in 1651, he presents the view that humans exist in a constant state of war with one another. In this state, everyone has a right to everything, and these unfettered rights produce unending anarchy and suffering. Without a social contract and without a strong sovereign, people would destroy themselves through their own selfishness and their endless competition for personal gain.

According to Hobbes, during any period in which people live without a common central power to restrain their animalistic natures, they are in a constant state of war — every person against every other person. In this condition there is no individual rationality; only a collective rationality, enforced by the sovereign, can hold such violence in check and spare people from the perpetual fear of violent death. The collective security provided by a strong authority offers the only path out of a life that would otherwise leave every person alone, impoverished, and condemned to a brutally short existence (Wolff, 1996, p. 9).

The Social Contract and the Need for Sovereign Authority

The state exists specifically to prevent human beings from destroying society as a whole. Hobbes centers his argument on demonstrating the necessity of a strong central authority to prevent societal violence and civil war. This necessity is rooted in the human tendency to maximize pleasure and minimize pain. The state mediates between these competing drives, and the people as a whole must obey the central power with which the collective has contracted in order to preserve civilization. In reaction to the religious and political hysteria of the Civil War, Hobbes formulated a highly mechanistic conception of the state — one grounded entirely in materialism (Wolff, 1996).

Conclusion: Understanding Hobbes in Historical Context

Of course, Hobbes' position seems extremely arrogant to us today, shaped as we are by Locke's philosophy. However, in his own time, the social contract he proposed would likely have appeared far more appealing. In the aftermath of devastating civil war, people are willing to trade individual rights for order, driven by vivid memories of the violence and chaos that preceded it. Only as those memories fade do the pressures that make Hobbes' philosophy compelling begin to ease. Keeping this historical reality in mind is essential to understanding his argument fully and evaluating it fairly.