THOMAS HOBBES: STATE OF NATURE
Thomas Hobbes concept of the state of nature is central to his political philosophy, particularly as lad out
in his work Leviathan. In Hobbes’ view the state of nature is a theoretical condition in which human live
without any established authority, laws, or government. It represents life before the formation of civil
society.
In his social contract theory, Hobbes gives the hypothesis of a “state of nature.” A very dark picture of
man’s condition in men’s pre social state. Men were brutal, selfish, egoistic, and devoid of the sense of
right and wrong. Everything depended on physical power which alone could limit the rights of men.
Hobbes saw human relationships as those of mutual suspicion and hostility. The one rule that men
acknowledged was that one would take the power if one had and retained it for so long as one could. In
this condition, there was no law, no justice, no notion of what is right and wrong, with only force and
fraud as the two cardinal virtues.
The state of nature prohibited the possibilities of comfortable living or civilized pursuits that made life
worthwhile and meaningful. The state of nature was a state of uncertainty and state of anarchy.
Competition, diffidence and glory were the three reasons that were responsible for quarrel and rivalry
among individuals.
The individual was the author of its own ruination. The state of nature degenerated into a state of war, a
war of every man against every man. The state of nature was a condition when political authority failed.
According to Hobbes’, even in this lawless state of nature, men enjoyed natural rights. Those rights which
were essential for self-preservation of the people. These absolute natural rights made men selfish and
brutal in nature.
To such condition of lawlessness and utter chaos, Hobbes recommended a state with absolute, unlimited
and centralized powers as the only effective remedy. And there, Hobbes gives us his idea of social
contract to create a sovereign.
Hobbes state of nature can be summarized under the following features;
1.Equality; he argues that, in the state of nature, all people are relatively equal in their physical and
mental abilities. While some may be stronger or smarter than others, these differences did not give
anyone a decisive advantage over the other.
2.Fear and Insecurity; because there is no authority to enforce laws or protect individuals, people live in
constant fear of violence and death. This fear leads to a state of distrust and competition, as people
strive to protect themselves and their resources.
3.War of all against all; Hobbes famously describes the state of nature as a “war of every man against
every man.” Without laws or common power to keep order, people are driven by self-interest, and
conflicts over resources inevitably arise. In this state life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”
4.Natural rights; in the state of nature, individual have the natural rights to do whatever they believe is
necessary to preserve their own life. This includes the right to use violence or taking whatever they need
to survive.
5.Need of social contract; Hobbes argues that to escape this chaotic and violent situation, people
rationally agree to form a social contract. They give up all their rights and submit to the authority of a
sovereign (a monarch) in exchange for preservation of peace, life, and prosperity of the people.
Criticisms
1.Pessimistic view of human nature; J. J Rousseau argues that Hobbes depiction of human in the state of
nature is overly pessimistic. Rousseau believed that humans are naturally peaceful and cooperative, with
war and competition being a product of civilization and property rather than natural instinct.
2.Humans are social animal; critics argues that human are naturally social creatures who tends to form
bonds and cooperate with each other, even without a strong authority.
3.Lack empirical analysis; critics pointed out that Hobbes state of nature is purely theoretical construct,
and that there is little or no historical evidence that human ever lived in such a state of constant fear and
violence.
4.Natural rights; critics argued that it is hard to imagine that man had rights in a pre-social or pre-
political stage. Hobbes makes contradictory state with regard to this connection. While on the one hand
he says that the state of nature was pre social, on the other hand, he wants us to believe that, on had
natural rights
