Thomas Hobbes's ethical and political ideas 

Social contract 

Hobbes argued that the state of nature is one in which there are no criteria for right and

wrong. People can take all they can; life becomes poor, solitary, brutish, nasty, and short. As

such, the state of nature is a state of war, which can only be ended if people agree to the social

contract. By doing so, individuals would have liberty into a sovereign and the target condition

that the sovereign power will safeguard. According to Hobbes, the sovereign authority is

supreme in that there is no authority above the sovereign power, and the will of this authority is

the law. However, it does not mean that the sovereign power is all en-compassing since subjects

are free to do what pleases them in cases where the sovereign is silent. I agree with this idea of

Hobbes since it is through the social contract where one can freely leave the state of nature and

get into civil society [5]. 

Materialism and self-knowledge 

Hobbes believed that the human body is like a machine. As such, political organizations

are similar to artificial human beings. Hobbes believes that the truth behind his ideas can be

proved by examining oneself and looking into ourselves to judge our passions and

characteristics, which are the core of human action. However, when an individual looks into

himself, he hardly sees the mechanical aspect, as alleged by Hobbes. This theory needs to be

better answered in Hobbes's first chapters, where he talks about different psychological

phenomena that include emotions, thoughts, and whole trains of reasoning as part of mechanical

interactions. Hobbes generates his idea of mechanistic science from the first principle to establish

his notion regarding human nature. Man can have memorable similes, metaphors, and distinctive
methods through science. However, this method could not provide a state of psychology and

physiology to yield a substantive or decisive idea of human nature [4].

According to Hobbes, the main point is that man is a mechanical object programmed to

obtain a specific interest in life. Others believe that Hobbes's mechanical aspect needs to leave

room for influencing moral ideas in which he thinks the effective influence in one’s behavior is

through incentives of pain and pleasure. I agree with this idea since it fits well in an illustrative

manner, for instance, there is no way moral beliefs could fail to work into mechanisms that drive

people daily [6]. Also, political organizations are formed by different people who have specific

interest for themselves.

Political philosophy 

According to this idea, Hobbes believes that human beings are vulnerable and needy.

Man is easily misled in an attempt to understand the world. The capacity to understand is fragile,

just as our ability to know. The ability to understand depends on language; thus, it is prone to

undue influence and error. When human being act, they do so impulsively or selfishly or with

some ignorance due to faulty thinking or due to other people’s emotional speech or bad theology.

So what would be the political fate of this ideal pathetic creature (human being)? [1].

Hobbes believes there could be little happiness in our lives together; the best is a peaceful

life via an authoritative sovereign power. The worst would be the natural condition of human

beings, a case of violence, constant threat, and insecurity. Hobbes thinks the only replacement

for a government would be a scenario that no one could wish for. Any effort to make a

government accountable will also undermine the public, threatening the non-government case,

which everyone must want to avoid. As such, the only better option is to have a sovereign

authority that will be wholly unaccountable to its people [1]. I support this idea of political
philosophy since people use politics to form government which is supreme but full of influence

and errors.

The poverty of human judgment and the need for science 

According to Hobbes, human judgment is unreliable, and thus, there is a need to use

science to make judgments. Self-interest, pains, and pleasures of the moment tend to distort

human judgment. Many people may share the same essential passions. However, various things

in the world affect us in different ways; thus, people are forced to use their feelings to judge

others. Each human being is usually in love with their opinions which they tend to bend to keep

them. When people use words that do not have real objects for reference or lacking clarity about

the real meaning of the used words, there is a danger not only that human thoughts will end up

being meaningless but instead will cause violent disputes [4].

People form beliefs regarding supernatural bodies, spirits, fairies, and so on, which

results in fear of where thoughts have gone, distorting human judgment further. Judgment is

swayed this and that way via colored and persuasive speech of others, who deliberately

hoodwink us, and this may have objectives that go contrary to our own excellent or common

good. In addition, our judgment relates to what human beings should do now, and where future

events are considered "the future" is mind fiction since it is not known to us [4]. This idea of

Hobbes is true since science is the only reliable and effective entity that can offer a reliable

understanding of the future as it defeats the vulnerability of human judgment.

Absolutism 

Hobbes believed in monarchy relative to other forms of government. However, he was

concerned that an effective government must exercise absolute authority regardless of its

condition. The government's powers must be neither limited nor divided. In his views, Hobbes
believed that powers of adjudication, legislation, taxation, and enforcement and war-making are

connected such that when one gets lost, it thwarts the practical application of the rest. For

instance, without enforcement and interpretation, the legislation would not serve to control

people’s conduct [3]. 

Only a government with what Hobbes calls "essential rights of sovereignty" can be

effective and reliable. This is because with partial sets of such rights being held by different

bodies that do not agree on their judgment, will cause paralysis of a government or civil war to

settle their dispute. In addition, imposing limitations on a government authority will cause

irresoluble disputes as people will think it has over crossed the limits. Where an individual is left

to decide whether a government is to be obeyed, disagreement and war will arise to settle the

issue or paralyze an effective government. Referring a resolution of the question to another

authority, itself being also limited and open to overstepping challenges, would also initiate the

non-finite decline of non-authoritative authorities. Referring this question to another authority

which is unlimited, would be relocating absolute sovereignty, a position that is entirely

consistent with Hobbes's ideas of absolutism [4]. I agree with this idea of absolutism since it

helps to prevent collapse of government and occurrence of state of nature if people treat

government as the absolute authority.

References

1. Hobbes, T. (2016). Leviathan (1651). By: Thomas Hobbes: Political

Philosophy. (n.p.): CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.

2. Parkin, J. (2007). Taming the Leviathan: The Reception of the Political and Religious

Ideas of Thomas Hobbes in England 1640–1700. United States: Cambridge University

Press.
3. The Oxford Handbook of Hobbes. (2016). United States: Oxford University Press.

4. UGC net political science unit 2 book with 400 question answer (theory +mcq) as par

updated syllabus. (2023). (n.p.): DIWAKAR EDUCATION HUB.

5. Hampton, J. (1988). Hobbes and the Social Contract Tradition. United States: Cambridge

University Press.

6. Strauss, L. (1963). The Political Philosophy of Hobbes: Its Basis and Its Genesis. United

Kingdom: University of Chicago Press.