Study Guide to Hobbes’ Leviathan,
Chapters XIII-XV
(Note: This Study Guide was originally prepared by Professor G. K. Plochmann at Southern Illinois University. I have made some modifications of my own.—Ron Yezzi)
(Note: *’s before items indicate relative degrees of importance.)
Chapter XIII
pp. 68-69
*In what sense are all men equal for Hobbes? Physically? Mentally?
**Trace carefully the argument from equal ability to equal hope to equal danger.
**What are the three principal causes of quarrel? How do the three preceding and one succeeding paragraphs relate to the causes of quarrel?
pp. 69-70
**Does "war" mean for Hobbes what we usually mean by it? Explain.
**Why does Hobbes define "war" first and then define "peace" as the negation of war?
**Explain the meaning and appropriateness of each adjective in Hobbes' famous phrase, "the life of man, solitary, poor. . . ."
**Does Hobbes mean that all men are inescapably evildoers? Explain your answer.
**How does Hobbes justify his claims about the natural condition of mankind? (Hint: 3 reasons)
*Explain what Hobbes means by the concord of small families and its dependence on natural lust.
**Does Hobbes think that men are naturally just, naturally unjust, or something else? Explain.
**What is the relation of the last paragraph of Chapter 13 to the three principal causes of quarrel? Are the passions inclining to peace more natural or less natural than the others? More or less strong?
**What two faculties of man incline him to peace?
**Reverend John Eachard, in Mr. Hobbes' State of Nature Considered (1672) thinks that his view implies "a certain supposed time, in which it was just and lawful for every man to hand, draw and quarter, whom he pleased, when he pleased, and after what manner he pleased; and to get, possess, use, and enjoy whatever he had a mind to . . . ." Estimate the accuracy of Eachard's interpretation.
**Bishop Bramhall, in an influential tract entitled, The Catching of the Leviathan, or the Great Whale. Demonstrating out of Mr. Hobbes his own Works, That no man who is thoroughly a Hobbist, can be a good Christian, or a Good Commonwealths man, or reconcile himself to himself. Because his Principles are not only destructive to all Religion but to all Societies; extinguishing the Relation between Prince and subject, Parent and Child, Master and Servant, Husband and Wife; and abound with palpable contradictions (1658), deplores Hobbes' view of human beings in a state of nature. Other authors, he says, "Do derive Commonwealth from the sociability of nature, which is mankind, most truely. But he will have the beginning of all humane society from mutual force. We see some kind of creatures delight altogether in solitude, rarely or never in company. We see others (among which is mankind) delight altogether in company, rarely or never in solitude. Let him tell me what mutual fears of danger did draw the silly bees into swarms; or the sheep or doves into flocks . . . and I shall conceive it possible that the beginning of humane society might be from fear also." Do you agree or disagree with Bramhall? Explain.
Chapter XIV
pp. 70-74
**Define and distinguish the following: right of nature, liberty, and law of nature.
**State and explain the first and second laws of nature. Explain his meaning when he says, "every man ought to endeavor peace . . ."
*What is necessary for peace? Is it possible to be peaceful in a warring society?
**Explain the meaning of laying down one's right. What are the two ways to do it? Are there any special implications that should be noted here? Explain.
*Does natural right lead to war or to peace? To what does natural law lead?
**What are the limits to laying down one's right? Why? Would you agree or disagree with Hobbes here?
*Define contract and covenant (right column, p. 71).
*”Signs by contract are either ‘express’ or ‘by inference’ (left column, p. 72). Explain what Hobbes means. Would you be bothered at all by what he says here?
**When is a covenant void? (Hint: See the first full paragraph on p. 73 and the first three paragraphs on p. 74.) Evaluate Hobbes’ position, giving justification.
*Note that a covenant with God is impossible, according to Hobbes (right column, top, p. 73). What do you take to be the significance of this paragraph?
Being freed from a covenant is different from the covenant becoming void. What is the difference?
**What does Hobbes say about covenants “entered into by fear” (last paragraph, p. 73) Do you agree with him? Why or why not?
**What does Hobbes say in the third last paragraph of Ch. XIV about the importance of fear in holding human beings to the performance of their covenants? Would you agree with him? Explain.
Chapter XV
pp. 75-80
*You should try to get a general understanding of the laws of nature listed in this chapter, but you needn't know each in detail.
**Be sure to be clear about the origin and meaning of justice and its role in the third law of nature, according to the first two paragraphs of Ch. XV? Hobbes’ discussion of justice continues to the right column of p. 77.
*How does Hobbes handle the problem of punishment (left column, p. 78)? Evaluate his treatment of punishment, giving justification.
**Summarize Hobbes’ overall statement concerning the laws of nature on pp. 79-80 (beginning with the second full paragraph in the right column on p. 79).
**What does Hobbes mean by obligation in foro interno and obligations in foro externo (p. 79)? What significance may be attached to the distinction?
*What is the "true and only moral philosophy" for Hobbes (left column, p. 80)? Why?
*Bishop Bramhall says, "A moral heathen would blush for shame to see such a catalogue of the Laws of Nature. First he maketh the Laws of Nature to be laws and no laws; not laws but theorems, laws which required not performance but endeavors, laws which were silent, and could not be put into execution in the state of nature, where all things were defined by a man's own judgement and . . . where there were no public judgements and no use of witnesses . . . Every one of these grounds here alleged are most false, . . . .” Would you agree more with Hobbes or Bramhall here? Justify your answer.
Return to Phil 336: Modern Philosophy page
Last
updated