"As it is necessary for
all men that seek peace, to lay down certain rights of nature; that is to say,
not to have liberty to do all they list: so is it necessary for a man's life,
to retain some; as right to govern their own bodies, enjoy air, water, motion,
ways to go from place to place; and all things else, without which a man cannot
live, or not live well." (p102)
Thomas Hobbes. Leviathan. J.C.A. Gaskin (ed. & introduction). Oxford World's Classics. Oxford University Press. 2008. Image: http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/119827-2012-10-01-inside-the-cold-calculating-libertarian-mind.htm?EdNo=001&From=
Hobbes is responsible for laying the foundations of the Libertarian concept of nontransferable rights. These are rights, or liberties, that, because reason mandates, one cannot give up. For example, the right of self-preservation is impossible to give up because it is irrational to do so. No one in their right mind would opt for death over a lesser sentence. For this reason, if a person is commanded to fight a battle he or she is sure to be killed fighting in, it is not irrational, or against the social contract, to refuse.
To Hobbes the most important, if not the only, nontransferable right is this right of self-preservation. All other nontransferable rights are derived from it, such as the right to food and water, air etc. If this right is violated, by either ruler or citizen the contract is breached, and as a result none of the clauses retain their authority. Disobedience (revolution!), therefore, is sometimes rational when the circumstances are right. But when are they? The answer to this question depends on what is understood by preservation of life. In Hobbes' philosophy the Leviathan still has the lion's share of the power, because the nontransferable right is severely restricted. Preservation of life is not understood to be the same as the safeguarding of individual, autonomous identity because that requires an authority over religious and cultural matters that the citizens of the commonwealth simply don't have.
However, the model has the potential to be completed in whatever way people want, as can be seen by many examples in the course of history. For example, the foundation, laid by Hobbes, has served the libertarians perfectly. They have only needed to add to the nontransferable rights some things that théy thought were important (or crucial to a man's life) like property. Exactly the potential of Hobbes' Leviathan to be used in such a libertarian way has led monarchists to call it the rebel's catechism.
Thomas Hobbes. Leviathan. J.C.A. Gaskin (ed. & introduction). Oxford World's Classics. Oxford University Press. 2008. Image: http://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/119827-2012-10-01-inside-the-cold-calculating-libertarian-mind.htm?EdNo=001&From=
At
the conception of the Leviathan there is a moment of doubt in which both
natural man and artificial man stand opposite each other and hesitate. In light
of the considerable sacrifices he must make it is only understandable that the
natural man should hesitate, but why should the Leviathan?
Hobbes is responsible for laying the foundations of the Libertarian concept of nontransferable rights. These are rights, or liberties, that, because reason mandates, one cannot give up. For example, the right of self-preservation is impossible to give up because it is irrational to do so. No one in their right mind would opt for death over a lesser sentence. For this reason, if a person is commanded to fight a battle he or she is sure to be killed fighting in, it is not irrational, or against the social contract, to refuse.
To Hobbes the most important, if not the only, nontransferable right is this right of self-preservation. All other nontransferable rights are derived from it, such as the right to food and water, air etc. If this right is violated, by either ruler or citizen the contract is breached, and as a result none of the clauses retain their authority. Disobedience (revolution!), therefore, is sometimes rational when the circumstances are right. But when are they? The answer to this question depends on what is understood by preservation of life. In Hobbes' philosophy the Leviathan still has the lion's share of the power, because the nontransferable right is severely restricted. Preservation of life is not understood to be the same as the safeguarding of individual, autonomous identity because that requires an authority over religious and cultural matters that the citizens of the commonwealth simply don't have.
However, the model has the potential to be completed in whatever way people want, as can be seen by many examples in the course of history. For example, the foundation, laid by Hobbes, has served the libertarians perfectly. They have only needed to add to the nontransferable rights some things that théy thought were important (or crucial to a man's life) like property. Exactly the potential of Hobbes' Leviathan to be used in such a libertarian way has led monarchists to call it the rebel's catechism.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.