POLITICAL THEORY – Thomas Hobbes

Thomas Hobbes believed that it is always better to have security rather than liberty in a country. He was therefore deeply opposed to the English Civil War – and would have predicted the chaos of the Arab Spring. Please subscribe here: http://tinyurl.com/o28mut7
If you like our films take a look at our shop (we ship worldwide): http://www.theschooloflife.com/shop/all/

Brought to you by http://www.theschooloflife.com

Produced in collaboration with Mad Adam
http://www.madadamfilms.co.uk

Comments

Ryan Masters says:

Without revolution and the voice of the people the world would be ruled by one dictator.

rouzbehazshab says:

It is peculiar how in the video on Jean-Jacques Rousseau the subject of the “social contract” is entirely passed on, but in this one the concept is used deliberately and frequently.Like the videos though.

Player Juan says:

while there are some thing were i can agree with hobbs i dont think the arab spring is a good example there just replacing one leviathan with another in islam or a democratic government and in those countries it usually dosent take long before corruption takes hold.

tonio789 says:

Hobbes was a coward

Carl Rosales says:

basically, hes just a pussy.

CegeRoles says:

While Hobbes advocation of an Absolute Sovereign is somewhat questionable, his understanding of human nature is far more realistic than Locke or Rousseau. Taken as a whole, human beings are extremely short-sighted, self-centered and irrational to the point of being self-destructive. In the absence of law or any form of social order, we would happily trample over the bodies of our friends and neighbors if it meant our continued survival.

Martin Castellon says:

so does the king get voted in ??

Liam Deschamps says:

This sounds ludicrous at first until you realize that in many cases – not all – he is right. Example: Libya. Gaddafi was a bad dude, but look at it now. They were way better off with him then they are in a power vacuum like they are now

mattler906 says:

If humans are incapable of governing themselves without society descending into mayhem, and if central authority is the solution (BIG if), then how come humans were capable of arriving at this solution on their own? Wouldn’t the fact that humans have solved this problem mean that humans are in fact capable of governing themselves? If this were true, then it would also be reasonable to expect that humans would have other solutions as well, especially ones that did not involve subservience to central authority. And if this is the case, then clearly, humans can govern themselves. On the other hand, if one still insists that humans cannot govern themselves, then any solution on government proffered by a human being, must be inherently suspect as well. In this case, central authority, as a solution, is highly suspicious. Either way, this isn’t looking good for the legitimacy of the philosopher kings, is it?

Maybe the problem isn’t that humans descend into barbaric mayhem when left alone. Maybe the problem is that tyrants want us to think that this is the natural outcome without their influence on our lives, going so far as to invent entire methodologies for inserting conflict into people’s lives, so as to legitimize their role (see “dialectical materialism”).

The naked truth seems to be that humanity tends towards stability, just like any other biological system (the term is homeostasis), and that this process generally results in social systems that establish and maintain peace. No state required. Anyone who doubts this simply needs to look at how the Gaels, or the Maori of NZ structured themselves. No state was required, yet sophisticated justice and stability was maintained by way of effective social infrastructure.

Hobbes is all about centralized authority, implying that it is the best avenue to achieve peace. This is horse-shit. Peace and justice is much easier to establish and protect when state power is limited to such an extent so that only basic functions of government can be conducted effectively. That can only happen when power is systemically decentralized. Hobbes’ argument is the same as saying “you will live in peace, as long as you do what your master says”, and I’m not buying it. Then again, maybe I’m one of the slaves that got out.

Jordan Smith says:

Hobbes is not sitting well with me.

DeadEndFrog says:

another thinker turned into a pawn for the struggles of the upperclass on who should rule the idiots and usefull idiots of the country.

step 1. look at the times
step 2. see something bad?
step 3. choose me!
for the benifit of a fantastic life in the upper class, im going to do bad things to people so they shut up and we can have peace.

however uncertanty and disorder are actually there so people can see that no one is in control of their lives, but they.

DerpTwerk says:

hobbes was an atheist?

A velvet Nightmare says:

something tells me this guy wouldn’t like Anarchism

BrutalCowFucker78 says:

Kinda disapointed .. thought that this would go further more in dept about theory and how Hobbes defended it, but yeah ..
That’s probably why the comments are like this ..

Filipe Borges says:

“Leviathan” is too boring at the beginning. Hobbes tried to explain and define a lot of terms which he used in the main part of his book, e.g.: Reason, Imagination, Passion. Really Tiresome!

emad ali says:

From my reading of Leviathan I never got the impression that Hobbes was an atheist.

He was certainly unorthodox and maybe even heretical but he seems to have believed in a providential supreme Deity.

KlaasKlar says:

6:20 – shouldnt it be “than” instead of “then”?

maskarafrosch says:

Really nice work, but please include some ladies: Hannah Arendt, Martha Nussbaum, Seyla Benhabib, Simone de Beauvoir, Judith Butler, etc…

Veronica Andrews says:

In his work with John Locke, I realize their opposite views; Hobbes and Locke both were British philosophers. “Governments are born not because God ordains them, but because life without government is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short” in Hobbes’s words and “inconvenient” in Locke’s.”

Anakin Skywalker says:

What a statist cuck.

Jack Johnston says:

you should of added how Hobbes believed Humans were nothing more than matter in motion and how man works.

demalya matthews says:

@school of life could you email me the total transcript of your video please and if possible I would love to ask if you could do a video comparing Thomas and John Locke’s view of legitimacy of government

Risen Demon says:

Technically all countries with a ruling body of government and laws have a Leviathan- it’s the government itself. The only reason I don’t fear being instantly robbed of all my expensive belongings every time I got outside into the streets is not because I believe in the goodness of humans (lol) but because I know most people would be too afraid to break the law and risk being caught, arrested, and sentenced. Trust is simply not possible until the day we can read the minds of others.

Amet45 says:

really? ghadaffi is a monster to you? for wanting to liberate his country from the dollar and go back to the gold standard to help his people and thus usa got him killed? retarded asshole

Joseph Whiting says:

Hobbes denied being an Atheist and said that atheism was the worst possible destination of society….

I am not The Walrus says:

“It is better to live one day as a lion than 100 years as a sheep.”

Rosemary Orellana says:

Can you please do a video about Hobbes’ elements of philosophy trilogy? I have a presentation due soon, but can’t find any good information.

proudhon100 says:

Everyone says that Leviathan is named after the absolute ruler. I am not so sure.

You must remember that Hobbes was writing in a very Biblically literate culture. Leviathan is mentioned in the Bible – Psalm 74 being an example. In ancient Hebrew thought Leviathan represented the forces of chaos, put in their palce by God’s creative work. Chaos was Hobbes’ chief concern. I think that this is the inspiration for the title of his book.

SonofSethoitae says:

The problem with Hobbes wasn’t that he was wrong about people; he’s right to say that, without government, “bad” people have an enormous advantage over “good” people.

Where he went wrong was believing that absolute autocracy was the solution. Really, all that does is institutionalize that “bad” people play in the state of nature. In the state of nature, anyone can break your legs and take your house, but Hobbes seems to think that letting one person do that to everyone is an improvement. Thank god we had progress on that front.

El Dromedario says:

hobbes is bullshit. i completely disagree. d only 1 fro these series w whom i completely disagree

Tori Nguyen says:

4:52-4:58 is literally trump

Dee Smith says:

Hobbs;  the inspiration of the Left, globalism and tyranny.  There was no ‘noble savage’, the state of nature wasn’t perfect or peaceful and to fetishize anything to such a degree is dangerous and stupid.  Like minded human beings form societies and the cultures that are reflected by the rules of their society and the governments that eventually form for the nation that is eventually manifested from the society.  There _is_ a “social contract” between the society/community and the voluntary members OF that community, which is the understanding that there’s safety in numbers and certain rules reflecting the shared beliefs, values and behaviors of the members of society allow for the members to go about their personal lives without being under constant attack from others.

kasamiro says:

Great video. However, nobody can assure that Hobbes was an atheist. In his works, he criticizes atheists and quotes the bible a lot. He was being accused of being an atheist because he criticizes a lot of things that people consider as bases of the christian faith. Probably, he believed in god as a first cause that is different from god in abrahamic religions but we can’t say that for sure either.

BOBBY PERU 1892 says:

3:55 – That ain’t the primeval statue of nature, that’s Sunderland on a Saturday night.

Nick Soper says:

I appreciate the sentiment of needing government, but would be nice to have unpacked a bit more why we shouldn’t want a better alternative, because after all if there is a ‘better’ alternative, why shouldn’t you want it?

Mariza Vasconcelos says:

cadê as legendas dos outros?

 Write a comment

*

Do you like our videos?
Do you want to see more like that?

Please click below to support us on Facebook!