LAST HOBBES, lec 8 PSCI 2004: Introduction to Western Political Thought - Hobbes on Liberty and Sovereignty

Hobbes on Liberty and Sovereignty

Hobbes on Liberty

  • Liberty as Absence of External Impediments: Hobbes defines liberty as the absence of "externall Impediments" [xxi, 1]. This means that if something is hindering one's movement or action from outside, then their liberty is restricted.
  • Internal vs. External Impediments: An impediment is not a lack of liberty if it's internal. For example, a stone lying still or a man fastened to his bed by sickness lacks power or ability, not liberty, because the impediment originates from within themselves [xxi, 1].
  • Definition of a Free-Man: A free-man is "he that in those things, which by his strength and wit he is able to do, is not hindered to doe what he has a will to" [xxi, 2]. This emphasizes the capacity to act according to one's will without external obstruction.
  • Civil Laws as "Artificial Chains": In a commonwealth, civil laws function as "artificial chains" [xxi, 5], binding individuals to certain behaviors.
  • Political Liberty: This refers to "those things, which in regulating their actions, the sovereign hath permitted." Examples include: the liberty to buy and sell, contract with one another, choose one's abode, diet, trade of life, and institute children as one sees fit [xxi, 6].

Natural vs. Political Liberty

  • Natural Liberty: This is the right of each "to every thing; even to one another's body." In this state, "there can be no security to any man" [Page 3]. It is the cause of conflict and is alienable.
  • Political Liberty: This is the right of each to act in areas either expressly permitted or allowed by "the silence of the law" [Page 3]. It is a social construct, a product of the social contract, and a central ideal for modern society.
  • Relationship Between Liberties: Individuals voluntarily forfeit their natural liberty in exchange for political liberty. While this makes people less free in some ways (bound to the sovereign and laws), it makes them more free in others by removing impediments caused by a lack of coordination among citizens.
  • Analogy: This trade-off is likened to "hedges are set, not to stop travelers, but to keep them in the way" [xxx, 21]. The laws guide behavior rather than outright prohibit beneficial actions.

Hobbesian Models of Freedom

  • Agent(s): Individual persons.
  • Obstacle: Other people exercising their liberty.
  • Goal(s): Peace and commodious living.

On Civil Laws

  • Definition: Civil laws are "the laws, that men are therefore bound to observe, because they are members, not of this, or that commonwealth in particular, but of a commonwealth" [xxvi, 1].
  • Rules of Just and Unjust: "Lawes are the Rules of Just, and Unjust; nothing being reputed Unjust, that is not contrary to some Law" [xxvi, 4]. This implies that justice is defined by existing law.
  • Natural Laws:
    • Natural laws may be declared as part of civil law but are not strictly required to be.
    • They "obliges all the subjects without exception" [xxvi, 13].
    • Natural laws "need not any publishing" and are "contained in this one Sentence" – "Do not that to another, which thou thinkest unreasonable to be done by another to thy selfe" [xxvi, 13].
  • Good Law vs. Just Law:
    • Hobbes states, "But what is a good Law? By a Good Law, I mean not a Just Law, for no law can be Unjust" (if made by the sovereign) [xxx, 20]. This means that if a sovereign makes a law, it is by definition just (justice is an internal quality of the law).
    • "A good Law is that, which is Needfull, for the Good of the People, and withall Perspicuous" [xxx, 20]. Goodness is an external quality related to utility and clarity.
    • Perspicuous: Clearly expressed and easily understood; lucid.

Justice and Equity

  • Sovereign's Duty: "The safety of the People, requireth further, from him, or them that have the Sovereign Power, that justice be equally administered to all degrees of People" [xxx, 15].
  • Equality in Justice: Both the rich and mighty, and the poor and obscure, must be righted of injuries. The powerful should have no greater hope of impunity for violence, dishonor, or injury than the less powerful.
  • Equity as a Law of Nature: "For in this consisteth Equity; to which, as being a Precept of the Law of Nature, a Sovereign is as much subject as any of the meanest of his People" [xxx, 15]. The sovereign is bound by the Law of Nature, which includes equity.
  • Justice/Injustice vs. Good/Bad Laws:
    • Justice and injustice are internal qualities of laws; if the sovereign commands it, it is just. One cannot claim a law on the books is unjust.
    • Good and bad are external qualities of laws; a law is good if it advances subjects' desires and bad if it hinders them. One can complain that a sovereign has made bad laws.

On the Dissolution of the Contract

  • Refusal to Obey Sovereign's Order: Subjects are generally free to refuse an order if their refusal does not frustrate the primary end for which sovereignty was established. "When therefore our refusall to obey, frustrates the End for which the Sovereignty was ordained, then there is no Liberty to refuse; otherwise there is" [xxi, 15].
  • Duration of Obligation: "The Obligation of Subjects to the Sovereign, is understood to last as long, and no longer, than the power lasteth, by which he is able to protect them" [xxi, 21].
  • Unalienable Right to Self-Protection: The natural right to protect oneself cannot be relinquished by any covenant if no one else can provide protection [xxi, 21].
  • Sovereignty as the Commonwealth's Soul: "The Sovereignty is the Soule of the Common-wealth; which once departed from the Body, the members do no more receive their motion from it" [xxi, 21].
  • Mortality of Sovereignty: While sovereignty is immortal "in intention of them that make it," it can suffer a violent death from foreign war or "through the ignorance, and passions of men, it hath in it" [xxi, 21].
  • Internal Dissolution: Commonwealths are "designed to live, as long as Man-kind, or as the Lawes of Nature, or as Justice it selfe, which gives them life." Therefore, when dissolved by "intestine disorder" rather than external violence, "the fault is not in men, as they are the Matter, but as they are the Makers, and orderers of them" [xxix, 1]. The problem lies with the governance, not the governed.
  • End of the Sovereign: The sovereign's ultimate purpose is "the procuration of the safety of the people, to which he is obliged by the Law of Nature" [xxx, 2].
  • "Safety of the People": This means not just "bare Preservation, but also all other Contentments of life" [xxx, 2].
  • Method of Ensuring Safety: This is accomplished "not by care applyed to Individualls, further than their protection from injuries, when they shall complain; but by a general Providence, contained in publique Instruction, both of Doctrine, and Example: and in the making, and executing of Good Lawes" [xxx, 2].

Plato vs. Hobbes (Ancient vs. Modern)

  • Plato (Ancient):
    • Humans are naturally unequal.
    • Individuals must control their appetites to become less selfish.
    • Rulers must be virtuous.
    • Goal is to instill a sense of community.
    • Freedom in a democracy is detrimental and leads to disorder.
    • Justice is a universal quality.
  • Hobbes (Modern):
    • Humans are naturally equal.
    • People are naturally selfish; appetites can only be redirected, not eliminated.
    • Rulers govern by fear.
    • Emphasizes atomistic individualism.
    • Freedom in the state of nature is dangerous and leads to civil war.
    • Justice is merely conventional.

Assessing Hobbes

  • Absolute Sovereignty: Hobbes defended absolute sovereignty, though not necessarily in the form of monarchy, and perhaps not as absolutist as often perceived.
  • Foundation for Liberal Rights: His concept of inalienable rights (e.g., to self-defense) as "true liberties of subjects" provides a foundational element for later liberal rights theories.
  • Criticism from Opponents: Bishop Bramhall famously referred to Hobbes's Leviathan as a "Rebell's Catechism," highlighting its controversial ideas.
  • Contractarian: Hobbes is a contractarian, proposing a government that is of and for (if not directly by) the people, established through consent.
  • Radical Assertions: He made radical assertions about the origin, nature, and purpose of power, championed moral equality, and presented a nascent view of accountability.
  • Methodological Innovation: His method of deducing laws of human behavior from premises of rational action anticipates modern social science.
  • Science as Progressive: Hobbes viewed science as a progressive and emancipatory project.

Sir Robert Filmer's Counter-Argument (Patriarcha, 1680)

  • Rejection of Natural Freedom: Filmer argues that "Mankind is naturally endowed and born with freedom from all subjection" is a "desperate assertion." He believes individuals are not at liberty to choose their form of government.
  • Rejection of Power from Multitude: He disputes the idea that power over others was initially bestowed "according to the discretion of the multitude."
  • Kings Subject to Censures: The assertion that kings are subject to the censures and deprivations of their subjects is a "necessary consequence" of the erroneous belief in natural equality and freedom.
  • Patriarchal Authority: Filmer asserts that in all kingdoms, regardless of how the ruler came to power, the authority held is "the only right and natural authority of a supreme father."
  • Perpetual Natural Right: He contends that "There is and always shall be continued to the end of the world a natural right of a supreme father over every multitude."
  • Divine Will: Filmer acknowledges that "by the secret will of God, many at first do most unjustly obtain the exercise of it" (referring to the supreme father's authority), implying that even unjust rulers hold a divinely sanctioned power.