Leviathan

Thomas Hobbes, in his work “Leviathan”, presents one of the most important political and philosophical theories of modern times. Written during a period of political unrest in the 17th century, this book explores the nature of human nature, the workings of society and the need for strong authority. Hobbes's philosophy is based on the idea that man is an essentially egoistic being whose actions are motivated by the desire for survival and power. This pessimistic view leads him to the idea of a social contract and the necessity of an absolute sovereign - Leviathan - to ensure order and protection. Through an analysis of the state of nature, subjective morality, the relationship between church and state, and fear as a motivating force, Hobbes creates a comprehensive vision of the workings of human society.

Imagine a world in which there are no laws, no governments, and no rules. A world where each person pursues only their own interests and security is a fleeting illusion. Thomas Hobbes calls such a world a state of nature - a place where uncertainty reigns and human relations are driven by fear and conflict. In this state, life is "solitary, miserable, brutish, and short." Why? Because without authority to guide behavior, human nature, driven by self-preservation and the desire for power, becomes a source of constant struggle. Imagine two travelers who are stranded on a deserted island. Without an agreement on resource sharing, one may decide to steal the other's supplies to ensure his survival. In the natural state, each is a potential enemy - motivated by distrust and a desire to prevent their own loss. Hobbes extends this principle to all of humanity. Without a social framework, all people become individualists who are willing to sacrifice others for their own benefit. Historical periods of military conflict, such as the period of the English Civil War (1642-1651), witnessed by Hobbes himself, provide an illustrative example. In a chaotic environment with no stable government, different groups were constantly confronting each other, with law and order remaining only distant ideals. Hobbes portrayed this very reality as a warning of what can happen if a society loses its system of authority. The state of nature is not only about violence; it is also an environment where the basic needs of man cannot be fully satisfied. In such a world, agriculture becomes inefficient, commerce stagnates, and no one can be sure that the fruits of his labor will not be forcibly confiscated. Imagine a city where the inhabitants are afraid to leave their homes because every street can be a scene of conflict. In this environment, innovation and development are impossible because people are forced to invest all their energy in their survival. Hobbes' idea of the state of nature is not only a philosophical concept, but also serves as an argument for the need for social order. He shows that only by joining forces and creating a framework of rules can people escape this chaotic state and create stable and prosperous communities. This transition from chaos to order, however, requires people's willingness to give up some of their freedom, which Hobbes elaborates in his idea of the social contract.

In response to the dangers of the state of nature, Hobbes offers a solution that is fundamental to modern political thought - the social contract. This is the idea that people voluntarily give up some of their freedom in order to gain protection and stability. Without such an agreement, they would remain trapped in an endless conflict where uncertainty and fear make any progress impossible. The social contract functions as an invisible consent between individuals who choose to submit to the authority of the sovereign. This sovereign, be it a ruler, a government or an institution, is tasked with enforcing rules, protecting human rights and ensuring security. Hobbes compares this act to the construction of a mighty Leviathan, a symbol of the sovereign who holds society together by his power. Without him, every man would be left to his own defense. Imagine a medieval village where the inhabitants agree to all pay taxes to fund the building of fortifications against external enemies. Without such a collective agreement, individuals might refuse to contribute, undermining the security of the entire community. Similarly, the social contract allows each individual to sacrifice a small portion of personal freedom in exchange for stability and peace. Historically, parallels can be seen in events such as the Magna Carta of 1215, which represented an agreement between the English barons and King John. While it was not Hobbes's idea of absolute sovereignty, it was the first step towards an organized power that respected mutual obligations. But Hobbes's vision of the social contract goes further - he argues that the sovereign must have absolute authority because only in this way can he maintain order. In contrast to contemporary democratic ideas, Hobbes stresses that the social contract is not only about rights but also about duties. If an individual breaks the rules of the contract, he risks chaos, which is worse than any restriction of freedom. Submission to authority is therefore not an expression of weakness, but a rational step to protect oneself and society. Hobbes's social contract theory teaches us that harmony and peace are not natural characteristics of humanity. They are the result of hard work and a collective decision to create a system that gives individuals room to grow, yet protects them from their own impulses. This concept remains a key foundation of the modern rule of law and the functioning of societies to this day.

When people enter into a social contract, they need an authority to oversee compliance and maintain order. According to Hobbes, this authority, called the sovereign, must have absolute power. Without it, society could once again plunge into the chaos of the state of nature, where no one is assured of security and rights. The sovereign therefore represents an uncompromising power entity that has the task of ensuring peace, stability and protection for all. Hobbes's idea of absolute sovereignty was influenced by the political instability of his time, particularly during the English Civil War. The visible anarchy and failure of weak governments led him to believe that only unlimited power could resist chaos. A sovereign may be a monarch, an assembly, or an institution, but he must have full authority over laws and decisions to prevent internal conflict and power struggles. Imagine a city facing unrest and chaos caused by rivalry among its inhabitants. One of its inhabitants becomes the leader whom the others choose as their protector, but only on condition that his power is not restricted. This leader imposes strict rules, preventing new conflicts from arising. Hobbes's Leviathan, whose absolute authority protects society from itself, functions similarly. At the same time, Hobbes rejects the notion that limited or distributed power can effectively govern society. In his view, when authority is divided, there is a risk of conflict between the various branches of power, which could lead to the return of chaos. Therefore, he argues that the sovereign must have the exclusive right to decide on matters of law, war, taxation and order. Critics of Hobbes's concept of absolute sovereignty often point to the risk of tyranny. If the sovereign abuses his power, the rights and liberty of citizens may suffer. But Hobbes argues that even the danger of tyranny is a lesser evil than a return to a state of war of all against all. Absolute sovereignty, then, represents a trade-off - a price to be paid for the preservation of peace. This idea remains an important theme in political philosophy, even as modern societies seek a balance between sovereignty and freedom. Hobbes's vision of Leviathan is a reminder that without strong authority, civilization is always one step away from chaos.

In a system based on a social contract, citizens have not only rights but also duties to a sovereign who guarantees them protection and order. This relationship is symbiotic - citizens sacrifice some of their freedom in exchange for the security and stability provided by authority. But without the fulfilment of these obligations, society would lose its cohesion and collapse once again into chaos. Every citizen is obliged to abide by the laws and decisions of the sovereign, even in cases where he or she may not share them. This prevents disputes and violent conflicts that could endanger the whole. In medieval cities, for example, people were subject to strict rules for trading in the markets. Although some rules may have restricted them, these regulations ensured fairness and order, thus protecting the interests of all participants. Hobbes's approach emphasizes that if the sovereign fulfills his role and provides protection to the citizens, they have no right to resist his authority. Respect for this hierarchy is necessary to avoid chaos. However, if the sovereign fails - if, for example, it fails to secure peace or allows systematic violations of citizens' rights - the social contract becomes invalid. This point provides the only moral justification for rebellion. An interesting example is the situation during the Great French Revolution (1789), when citizens felt that the monarchy could not live up to its commitment to protection and justice. This frustration resulted in rebellion and a demand for a new system that better reflected the social contract. Although Hobbes personally supported strong authority, his philosophy makes it possible to understand that stability depends on mutual accountability between citizens and sovereign. Citizen obligations are not only a negative constraint on freedom; they are also an act of investment in the future. By obeying laws, paying taxes and supporting authority, they contribute to the functioning of the state, which in turn protects them from external and internal threats. In this way, Hobbes shows that freedom is not only the absence of constraints, but also the ability to live in a society where basic needs and security are guaranteed. This idea remains important in today's democracies, where the rights and duties of citizens form the basis of the rule of law. Hobbes's concept reminds us that social cohesion is only possible if citizens actively support the rules and institutions that protect them.

Thomas Hobbes raises an important question about morality - what is good and what is bad? In “Leviathan”, he argues that these concepts are neither universal nor objective. Rather, they are based on individual desires, needs, and fears. What is good for one person may be bad for another, because in the state of nature everyone pursues his or her own self-interest. In the state of nature, where there is a lack of rules and authority, good is that which promotes the survival of the individual and evil is that which harms the individual. Imagine a person who hungrily searches houses for food. For him, it is good to find and take food, but for another who possesses it, this act is evil because it threatens his survival. Such subjectivity of good and evil leads to inevitable conflicts that cannot be resolved without external authority. Hobbes shows that the only way to overcome this relativity is to create a social system that establishes uniform rules. The authority of the sovereign thus becomes the arbiter that determines what is right and wrong in the context of the whole society. What would be considered wrong in the state of nature, such as violent killing, can be transformed into legitimate in a social system when it comes to the state's administration of justice. Historical examples show that subjective understandings of right and wrong can lead to chaos. During the gold rush in America in the 19th century, violent conflicts over land rights were frequent. It was good for gold miners to protect their deposits, while their adversaries may have seen fit to appropriate them. The creation of laws and sheriff institutions gradually reduced these disputes. At the same time, Hobbes's perception of moral values raises the question of the relationship between human desires and social rules. An individual may be forced to submit to laws that do not correspond to his inner convictions, but by this compromise he gains stability and protection. The sovereign thus transforms the subjective understanding of right and wrong into a collective norm that serves the entire community. This idea is particularly relevant today, when we are faced with cultural and ethical diversity. Hobbes reminds us that the search for the common good is not easy, but without an authority to guide different views of morality, society would quickly disintegrate. Good and evil are not fixed concepts, but tools that serve to maintain harmony in a complex world.

One of the most prominent themes in “Leviathan” is the question of the relationship between church and state. Thomas Hobbes argues that in order for society to function without conflict, secular power must be superior to ecclesiastical power. Indeed, religious differences and the authority of the church often lead to schisms that threaten the stability of the community. For this reason, the sovereign must control religious issues to ensure unity and order. Hobbes was aware of the dangers of the religious wars that devastated Europe in the 16th and 17th centuries, such as the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648). This series of conflicts, while having both political and economic aspects, was inherently motivated by religious differences between Catholics and Protestants. Hobbes perceived that if the power of the church was not curtailed, religious authorities might question the decisions of the sovereign, leading to a destabilisation of society. Imagine a society where the church has autonomy over certain legal or ethical issues. If the church and the state were to issue conflicting edicts, the population would find itself in a moral dilemma: obey the laws of the state or follow religious precepts. This duality of power would undermine the authority of the sovereign and could provoke unrest or civil war. Hobbes argues in his work that religion should serve as a tool to promote stability, not as an independent institution. The sovereign has the right to determine what religious doctrines are permitted, so that their content does not disturb the harmony of society. This approach may seem authoritarian, but for Hobbes it is a key way to prevent the division of power and chaos. Although this view may seem outdated, modern states draw on similar principles. Secularization in most democracies is the result of efforts to prevent religious institutions from influencing legislation or policy. In France, for example, the separation of church and state by law as early as 1905 ensured neutrality on religious issues. Hobbes's notion of the primacy of secular over ecclesiastical power is not only a philosophical concept but also a practical solution to conflict. His work shows that the stability of society is only possible if there is a clear and unified authority that can enforce rules without the disturbing influence of religious differences. This concept remains the basis of many political systems around the world today.

In his philosophy, Thomas Hobbes expands the view of human nature by seeing it as part of the mechanistic system of the world. According to him, the entire universe, including man, is governed by the laws of mechanics and motion. Everything man does - from thinking to acting - is the result of the movement of particles in his body. This materialist view was groundbreaking because it changed the way humans perceived their existence and interaction with the world. Hobbes compares humans to clocks whose operation is determined by the interaction of their individual cogs. The heart, the brain, the nervous system all work together to drive the body, much like a machine. Thoughts, desires, and decisions are not, according to Hobbes, spiritual entities, but physical processes that take place within the material body. This idea is also evident in his political philosophy. The state, like Hobbes's Leviathan, functions as a large mechanism where individuals represent its parts. Each of these parts has a role to play, with the whole system being governed by a sovereign who serves as a central force, akin to a clockwork movement. If one part becomes damaged or stops working, the whole system can collapse. Hobbes's materialist understanding of man is based on his interest in the science and philosophy of his time. He lived at a time when Isaac Newton and Galileo Galilei were laying the foundations of the modern understanding of the laws of nature. This scientific context influenced his belief that everything, including human behavior, could be explained by natural laws without the need for supernatural concepts. However, this philosophy raises questions about free will and responsibility. If all our actions are the result of inevitable physical processes, how can we speak of morality or ethics? Hobbes resolves this dilemma by arguing that even though man is part of a mechanical system, he has the capacity to act in accordance with the rules of the social contract, thereby contributing to the functioning of the larger whole - the state. Thomas Hobbes's mechanistic materialism is the basis not only of his anthropology but also of his political philosophy. It represents a revolutionary view of man as a being who is not separate from nature, but an integral part of it. This concept reminds us that our thinking and behaviour are intertwined with the laws of the universe, and that harmony is only possible if each individual acts in harmony with the system of which he or she is a part.

According to Thomas Hobbes, one of the key factors that drives people to enter into a social contract is fear. In the state of nature, where there is constant uncertainty, the fear of violent death is the main driver of human behaviour. This fear motivates individuals to give up some of their freedom and submit to an authority that can ensure their safety. Hobbes describes the state of nature as a constant struggle for survival where no one can trust another. The fear of someone else attacking first forces individuals to act preemptively, often aggressively. Imagine small settlements in the early Middle Ages where the inhabitants lived under the constant threat of raids. This fear prompted them to build walls, organize defensive groups, and elect leaders to protect their lives and property. According to Hobbes, fear is a natural response to chaos and uncertainty, which is why it is the basis of social order. The fear of anarchy is stronger than the desire for complete freedom. This principle explains why people voluntarily accept constraints and submit to the authority of a sovereign, even though that authority may be harsh or authoritarian. Historically, Hobbes's theory can be applied to many situations where the fear of losing control has led to the creation of strong states. During the French Revolution (1789), fear of the chaos that followed the fall of the monarchy set the stage for the rise of Napoleon Bonaparte. Although his rule was authoritarian, many citizens saw it as a guarantee of stability after years of uncertainty. Hobbes warns, however, that this fear should not be exploited. A sovereign who becomes an instrument of tyranny may eventually lose the support of the people. The fear of chaos must be balanced by the certainty that authority will indeed ensure order and protection. If this balance is upset, the social contract may be called into question. Fear, which Hobbes sees as a negative impulse, paradoxically leads to positive outcomes: the creation of laws, organization, and unity. This idea reminds us that the human desire for security is the universal driver of progress. Fear of the unknown may be frightening, but it is also a force that binds societies together in the struggle for stability and order.

“Leviathan” is a timeless work that reveals how fragile the foundations of civilization are and how necessary authority is to maintain stability. Hobbes's philosophy offers a profound understanding of human nature, where fear, egoism, and the desire for security shape the behavior of individuals and entire societies. Although his notion of absolute sovereignty has provoked debate and controversy, his social contract theory has become a staple of modern political thought. “Leviathan” remains an important work not only for philosophers but also for anyone interested in the mechanisms that shape our societies and the role of power, rules, and fear in maintaining them. Hobbes's perspective is a reminder that although a civilization may appear solid, without a system of authority it could quickly collapse into chaos. Do you have feedback for us? We'd love it if you let us know your opinion on our content! Just send an email to feedback@rewio.app with the title of this book in the subject line and share your impressions!