Thomas Hobbes
Bez państwa życie byłoby wojną wszystkich ze wszystkimi, więc ludzie zgadzają się poddać potężnemu władcy, który utrzymuje pokój.
Umiejscowienie
W stanie natury panuje wojna wszystkich ze wszystkimi – pokój zapewniają dopiero umowa społeczna i silny suweren.
Kluczowe idee
- Stan natury
- Umowa społeczna
- Lewiatan
Wpływ
Pod wpływem 3
Niccolò Machiavelli
pod wpływem sporne
The link is disputed; it rests on three discourses in Horae Subsecivae (1620), attributed to the young Hobbes by computer analysis, which read Tacitus in a Machiavellian vein. N. B. Reynolds and A. W. Saxonhouse (eds.), Thomas Hobbes: Three Discourses (1995); Horae Subsecivae (1620)
Źródło: szkic AI
Niccolò Machiavelli › 1469–1527
Francis Bacon
pod wpływem ✓
Hobbes served Bacon as secretary in his last years, taking down his thoughts and helping translate Essays into Latin (Aubrey); how far Bacon shaped him is debated. J. Aubrey, Brief Lives, “Thomas Hobbes”; SEP “Thomas Hobbes”
Francis Bacon › 1561–1626
Galileusz
pod wpływem
Hobbes visited Galileo in 1636 and, in the dedication of De Corpore (1655), praised him for opening the gate of natural philosophy through the nature of motion. T. Hobbes, De Corpore (1655), Epistle Dedicatory; SEP “Thomas Hobbes”
Źródło: szkic AI
Galileusz › 1564–1642
Wpływ na 7
Baruch Spinoza
wpływ na ✓
Spinoza took Hobbes’ thesis that natural right extends as far as power (Theological-Political Treatise, 1670), but kept natural right intact in the civil state (letter to Jelles, 1674). B. Spinoza, Tractatus theologico-politicus (1670); letter to J. Jelles (1674); SEP “Spinoza’s Political Philosophy”
Baruch Spinoza › 1632–1677
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
wpływ na ✓
The young Leibniz wrote to Hobbes in 1670 and built his early physics on Hobbes’ conatus, the beginning of motion (Theory of Abstract Motion, 1671). G. W. Leibniz, letter to T. Hobbes (1670); Theoria motus abstracti (1671); SEP “Leibniz’s Philosophy of Physics”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz › 1646–1716
David Hume
wpływ na
Paul Russell (1985) argued that the scope and plan of Hume’s Treatise (1739–40) were modelled on Hobbes’ Elements of Law (1640); the thesis is debated. P. Russell, “Hume’s Treatise and Hobbes’s The Elements of Law”, Journal of the History of Ideas 46 (1985); The Riddle of Hume’s Treatise (2008)
Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO
David Hume › 1711–1776
Ferdinand Tönnies
wpływ na
Tönnies edited Hobbes’s Elements of Law and Behemoth (1889), wrote a Hobbes monograph (1896) and modelled his Gesellschaft, an association of calculating individuals, partly on Hobbes. F. Tönnies, Gemeinschaft und Gesellschaft (1887); Hobbes Leben und Lehre (1896); T. Hobbes, The Elements of Law and Behemoth, ed. F. Tönnies (1889)
Źródło: szkic AI
Ferdinand Tönnies › 1855–1936
Carl Schmitt
wpływ na ✓
Schmitt took Hobbes’s ‘auctoritas, non veritas facit legem’ as the formula of decisionism (Politische Theologie, 1922) and later examined the Leviathan as a failed political symbol (1938). C. Schmitt, Politische Theologie (1922); Der Leviathan in der Staatslehre des Thomas Hobbes (1938); SEP “Carl Schmitt”
Źródło: także w Wikidanych · Wikidata
Carl Schmitt › 1888–1985
Talcott Parsons
wpływ na
Parsons made the ‘Hobbesian problem of order’, why society does not dissolve into a war of all against all, the starting point of his action theory (1937). T. Parsons, The Structure of Social Action (1937); T. Hobbes, Leviathan (1651); SEP “Thomas Hobbes”
Źródło: szkic AI
Talcott Parsons › 1902–1979
Norberto Bobbio
wpływ na
Bobbio edited Hobbes’s De cive in Italian (1948) and read him as the founder of the modern natural-law model of the state (Thomas Hobbes, 1989). N. Bobbio, Thomas Hobbes (1989); T. Hobbes, Elementi filosofici sul cittadino, ed. N. Bobbio (1948); N. Bobbio and M. Bovero, Società e stato nella filosofia politica moderna (1979)
Źródło: szkic AI
Norberto Bobbio › 1909–2004
Krytyka
Krytyka ze strony 10
Margaret Cavendish wpływ na
wpływ na
Through her husband’s circle, which included Hobbes, Cavendish shared his view that nature is wholly material, but made matter self-moving and perceptive (Philosophical and Physical Opinions, 1655). M. Cavendish, Philosophical and Physical Opinions (1655); Philosophical Letters (1664); SEP “Margaret Lucas Cavendish”
Źródło: szkic AI
krytyka ze strony
Cavendish rejected Hobbes’s account of perception as pressure transmitted from objects to the organs, holding that perceiving matter patterns the object by its own motions (Philosophical Letters, 1664). M. Cavendish, Philosophical Letters (1664), Part I (letters on Hobbes); SEP “Margaret Lucas Cavendish”
Źródło: szkic AI
Margaret Cavendish › 1623–1673
Anne Conway
krytyka ze strony
Conway rejected Hobbes’s materialism, including his claim that God is corporeal, holding that body as Hobbes conceives it could neither think nor feel (Principles, 1690, ch. 9). A. Conway, Principia philosophiae antiquissimae et recentissimae (1690), ch. 9; SEP “Anne Conway”
Źródło: szkic AI
Anne Conway › 1631–1679
John Locke wpływ na
wpływ na ✓
Locke’s early Two Tracts on Government (1660–62) defended an absolute magistrate close to Hobbes; later he kept the state of nature and consent but denied reading Hobbes closely. J. Locke, Two Tracts on Government, ed. P. Abrams (1967); replies to Stillingfleet (1697–99); SEP “Locke’s Political Philosophy”
krytyka ze strony
Locke set the state of nature apart from the state of war and rejected absolute rule as its remedy (Second Treatise, 1689, §§19, 93); Hobbes is not named. J. Locke, Second Treatise of Government (1689), §§13, 19, 90–94; SEP “Locke’s Political Philosophy”
Źródło: szkic AI
John Locke › 1632–1704
Anthony Ashley-Cooper
krytyka ze strony
Shaftesbury rejected Hobbes’s picture of humans as solely self-interested, holding that natural affection for others and for the common good belongs to human nature (Sensus Communis, 1709). Shaftesbury, Sensus Communis (1709), II.1, III.1; An Inquiry concerning Virtue or Merit (1699/1711); SEP “Lord Shaftesbury”
Źródło: szkic AI
Anthony Ashley-Cooper › 1671–1713
Monteskiusz
krytyka ze strony
Montesquieu held against Hobbes that humans in nature would be timid; peace is the first natural law, and war begins with society (Spirit of the Laws, 1748, I.2–3). Montesquieu, De l’esprit des lois (1748), I.2–3
Źródło: szkic AI
Monteskiusz › 1689–1755
Jean-Jacques Rousseau wpływ na
wpływ na
In The Social Contract (1762) Rousseau praised Hobbes as the only Christian author who dared to reunite the ‘two heads of the eagle’, state and church. J.-J. Rousseau, Du contrat social (1762), “De la religion civile”; SEP “Jean Jacques Rousseau”
Źródło: także w InPhO · InPhO
krytyka ze strony
Rousseau objected that Hobbes gave natural man the passions of social man and overlooked natural pity (Discourse on the Origin of Inequality, 1755, Part I). J.-J. Rousseau, Discours sur l’origine et les fondements de l’inégalité (1755), Part I; SEP “Jean Jacques Rousseau”
Źródło: szkic AI
Jean-Jacques Rousseau › 1712–1778
Pokaż wszystko (10)Pokaż mniej
Catharine Macaulay
krytyka ze strony
Macaulay’s Loose Remarks on Hobbes’s Philosophical Rudiments of Government (1767) rejected his case for absolute sovereignty and appended a sketch of a democratic constitution. C. Macaulay, Loose Remarks on Certain Positions to be Found in Mr. Hobbes’s Philosophical Rudiments of Government and Society (1767); SEP “Catharine Macaulay”
Źródło: szkic AI
Catharine Macaulay › 1731–1791
Mary Midgley
krytyka ze strony
Midgley used ethology against Hobbes’s picture of humans as natural egoists: sociability and care are as much part of evolved human nature as competition (Beast and Man, 1978). M. Midgley, Beast and Man (1978); The Solitary Self: Darwin and the Selfish Gene (2010)
Źródło: szkic AI
Mary Midgley › 1919–2018
Carole Pateman
krytyka ze strony
Pateman held that Hobbes grants women natural equality and mothers original dominion, yet his civil order rests on their subjection by conquest and contract (The Sexual Contract, 1988). C. Pateman, The Sexual Contract (1988); “‘God Hath Ordained to Man a Helper’: Hobbes, Patriarchy and Conjugal Right”, British Journal of Political Science 19 (1989)
Źródło: szkic AI
Carole Pateman › ur. 1940
Charles W. Mills
krytyka ze strony
Mills noted that Hobbes, denying that the state of nature ever generally existed, located it among ‘the savage people in many places of America’ (The Racial Contract, 1997). C. W. Mills, The Racial Contract (1997); T. Hobbes, Leviathan (1651), ch. 13
Źródło: szkic AI
Charles W. Mills › 1951–2021
Krytykuje 2
Arystoteles
krytykuje
Hobbes wrote that scarcely anything is more absurd than Aristotle’s Metaphysics or more repugnant to government than his Politics, attacking ‘separated essences’ (Leviathan, 1651, ch. 46). T. Hobbes, Leviathan (1651), ch. 46
Źródło: szkic AI
Arystoteles › 384–322 p.n.e.
Kartezjusz
krytykuje
Hobbes argued that a thinking thing might be corporeal and that we have no idea of God or of the soul in Descartes’ sense (Third Objections, 1641). Descartes, Meditationes (1641), Third Objections and Replies (AT VII 171–196)
Źródło: szkic AI
Kartezjusz › 1596–1650
Dzieła
- 1651Lewiatan
Jedyne wyjście z wojny wszystkich przeciw wszystkim: umowa tworząca absolutnego suwerena.
Stanowisko
Hobbes wanted to build political philosophy on the model of geometry and mechanics. Human beings are bodies in motion, driven by desire and above all by fear of violent death. Without a common power, life would be a war of all against all – “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”. Reason therefore leads people to a social contract in which they transfer their rights to a sovereign, the Leviathan, whose power must be undivided to guarantee peace. Hobbes grounded the state not on divine right but on the consent and interest of individuals. He thereby founded modern contract theory, with which Locke, Rousseau and Kant all argued.
Życie i kontekst
Born in Malmesbury in 1588, Hobbes studied at Oxford and spent much of his life as tutor and secretary to the Cavendish family. On his travels he met Galileo and the circle of Mersenne in Paris. Fearing the coming civil war, he fled to France in 1640, where he tutored the future Charles II. Back in England from 1651, he lived on, much disputed, until 1679.
Dalsze główne dzieła
- The Elements of Law (1640)
- On the Citizen (De Cive) (1642)
- Leviathan (1651)
- On Body (De Corpore) (1655)
- Behemoth (c. 1668)
Pojawia się w
- Podróż „Co jest sprawiedliwe?” · Przystanek 3 z 10
- Debata „Czy jesteśmy wolni? Wolna wola w epoce neurobiologii”
- Debata „Wojna i pokój: kiedy użycie siły zbrojnej jest uzasadnione?”
Stan na listopad 2026 · Źródła · Ulepsz tę stronę · Jak powstaje Agora