Mesgale

Hobbes notes II

Ch. 17-21, 29-33, 46-47

We talked last time about how the political community, ruled by a sovereign, is founded on the principle of self-restraint, that is, how individuals give up their right of self-governance to a sovereign power, which in turn provides security to the community. This is a narrative about how the notion of social security emerges out of pragmatic self-interest. We also indicated that the sovereign has the authority to assert power over the matters of faith and doctrine, otherwise he invites discord. In the second part, Hobbes goes into the details of his solution to the problem of state of nature. Part three aims to subvert the idea of an independent source of political authority stemming from the Church (and Hobbes has some quite interesting things to say about the authority of scriptural texts). Finally, in part four, he launches an attack on the political roles historically played by the Church and by the institutions of medieval scholasticism.

We don’t need to follow an order and proceed with a follow-up discussion on his scientific approach, particularly his skepticism, which offers an absolute rejection of Aristotelian essentialism. Then, we shall problematize the implications of his skepticism for his political theory. Read: Ch. 46, the part on the “errors concerning abstract essences” on p. 446. # 16, 18, 21.

Questions:

1. Having argued all this, can we say that Hobbes is strictly a dogmatic materialist? Does he think that the only substances are bodies and there are no immaterial substances?

ASK THIS AND AFTER THE COMMENTS, READ THEM THE PART ON HIS CORRESPONDENCE WITH DESCARTES.

To sum up, he rejects Aristotelian essentialism on the ground that human beings can never come to know the true nature of natural things. What is known is limited to sensory appearances, depending on the conditions of perception as well as the perceiver. One major cause behind this debate is that Hobbes thinks...