Customer Reviews

Leviathan (Oxford World's Classics)

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

You can't beat this kindle edition! It is FREE and is a great rendition of the book!!!

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) wrote "Leviathan" in 1651, it was his most important philosophical work. I think you should know something of Hobbes to understand how his thinking was influenced by his experiences. He was born 2 months prematurely on the day the Spanish Armada approaches the English coast. His mother's fear of invasion caused the premature birth. Hobbes remarked late in life, "his mother brought forth twins-myself and fear." Fear seems to be Hobbes life long companion and the key passion in his political system, which uses human passions as its foundation. He was a child prodigy reading Latin and Greek at the age of six years old. At fifteen, he entered Oxford University and hated his educational experience there. He thought the curriculum was too immersed in the ancient Greek philosophers like Aristotle. He called them "erroneous doctrines," and throughout his life he railed against English universities for there stodgy curriculum.

At the age of 22, he graduates and takes a job to tutor the son of the Earl of Devonshire. It gives him the opportunity to travel throughout Europe where he meets with Galileo in Florence and Descartes in Paris. Descartes calls Hobbes the greatest political philosopher of his day. During the British civil war, Hobbes flees to Paris because he is a well-known monarchist sympathizer. In 1651, he publishes his monumental work "Leviathan." He returns to England, submits to Cromwell's government, and withdraws from politics. He is on friendly terms with Charles II when the Stuart's are restored to the throne.

Hobbes philosophy is "materialistic"; he is greatly influenced by Galileo's mechanistic approach to science, and Euclidian geometry. His ambition was to explain all phenomena, man, and government with mathematical precision. In "Leviathan," he explains human conduct is a product of human passions. The most dominant passions are fear of violent death and desire for power, both are manifestations of man's most basic impulse, "self preservation." Hobbes asserts that the basic impulse is the right of the individual; he calls it a "natural right." All men process this natural right equally. This theory leads Hobbes to believe man's natural state to be one of constant conflict with each other. This leads him to write the following quote he is most known for: "men's lives are solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." So as not to have to live in constant state of fear or conflict, men make a contract for protection with the state. Hobbes believes that the best state is one led by a single sovereign whose power must be unrestricted with all three branches of government devolving to him. A single sovereign who has absolute power and cannot be replaced by the people.

His political writing had immediate influence in the world and influences other philosophers like Spinoza, Hutcheson, Locke, and Hume. Hobbes is the first man to write about political philosophy in such methodical terms. He is an excellent writer and his theories are easy to understand by the laymen. As a graduate student of political philosophy, I recommend if you have an interest in politics, philosophy, or government then you must start with reading Hobbes "Leviathan."

Being a free Kindle edition there is no introduction and no notes - but you do get the full text. The only difference from the original is that there are fewer capitals and italics. Hobbes used them for emphasis very much more than a modern writer would, and their pruning in this edition makes the text easier to read.

Modern political philosophy begins with Hobbes. Before Hobbes, writers for centuries had accepted the divine right of kings or did not think much about the origins of government. Hobbes provides reasons as to how and why men come together to form government. He starts with the assumption that the organized state is a choice. The alternative is the "state of nature", where there is both a "right" of nature and "laws" of nature. Hobbes uses these terms in a very individual way. The "right" of nature is "the Liberty each man hath, to use his own power...for the preservation of his own Life". The "laws" of nature dictate that each person should seek to live with others in peace, and should only retain the right to as much liberty as he is willing to permit others. These "laws" are found by reason, and are utilitarian rather than moral. Hobbes is simply saying that if men think about their situation, reason tells them that giving up their natural rights in exchange for others doing likewise is the best means of self-preservation, even though actually doing it is contrary to human nature.

On human nature Hobbes is cynical. Reason suggests advantages stem from co-operation, but unless men are constrained by an external authority this is outweighed by instinct. Men are fundamentally competitive and selfish. They are also roughly equal in ability so no one person can impose his will on others, and the most one can hope for is to protect oneself from others. Life in the state of nature is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short." Men are therefore driven to create government via a pact with others to give up their natural rights to a sovereign authority, which may be either an individual or an oligarchy (Hobbes prefers the former). Hobbes uses the concept of a "social contract". It is not an historical event but a logical device to describe the ongoing basis of consent to government. Hobbes' view of human nature is such that he allocates absolute power to the sovereign. Limited government, he believed, is unworkable for men are too prone to division and selfishness, and "a kingdom divided against itself cannot stand." Influenced by the divisive years preceding the English Civil War, Hobbes grants the sovereign the power of censorship, including the ability to prevent discussion of religion because such discussion leads to conflict. Anybody seeking to preach a new religion should be treated as a criminal.

Had Hobbes been writing a century later then religion would almost certainly have played no part in his writings. He himself was not a religious man. His concern with religion stemmed from its role in the conflict leading to the English Civil War, a period during which he lived.

Is there an ultimate right of rebellion against the absolute ruler? The answer is to be found in the nature of the social contract. Men give up their natural right to self-preservation to a sovereign in order to to better achieve it. If a situation arises where the sovereign cannot ensure that safety then society is dissolved. Can any action by the sovereign be challenged? Yes, if a man is conscripted into military service (an obvious threat to life) in circumstances where the survival of the state is not threatened. If the survival of the state is threatened then so are the lives of its citizens, and in these circumstances the sovereign can impose conscription. Hobbes adds that even in this case a citizen should have the right to replace himself with a volunteer if one is available.

"Leviathan" is not an easy book, not helped by the fact that the English is that of a man born just 24 years after Shakespeare. However, it is an important work that makes a good study companion to Locke's "Second Treatise", which argues for limited government.

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) wrote "Leviathan" in 1651, it was his most important philosophical work. I think you should know something of Hobbes to understand how his thinking was influenced by his experiences. He was born 2 months prematurely on the day the Spanish Armada approaches the English coast. His mother's fear of invasion caused the premature birth. Hobbes remarked late in life, "his mother brought forth twins-myself and fear." Fear seems to be Hobbes life long companion and the key passion in his political system, which uses human passions as its foundation. He was a child prodigy reading Latin and Greek at the age of six years old. At fifteen, he entered Oxford University and hated his educational experience there. He thought the curriculum was too immersed in the ancient Greek philosophers like Aristotle. He called them "erroneous doctrines," and throughout his life he railed against English universities for there stodgy curriculum.

At the age of 22, he graduates and takes a job to tutor the son of the Earl of Devonshire. It gives him the opportunity to travel throughout Europe where he meets with Galileo in Florence and Descartes in Paris. Descartes calls Hobbes the greatest political philosopher of his day. During the British civil war, Hobbes flees to Paris because he is a well-known monarchist sympathizer. In 1651, he publishes his monumental work "Leviathan." He returns to England, submits to Cromwell's government, and withdraws from politics. He is on friendly terms with Charles II when the Stuart's are restored to the throne.

Hobbes philosophy is "materialistic"; he is greatly influenced by Galileo's mechanistic approach to science, and Euclidian geometry. His ambition was to explain all phenomena, man, and government with mathematical precision. In "Leviathan," he explains human conduct is a product of human passions. The most dominant passions are fear of violent death and desire for power, both are manifestations of man's most basic impulse, "self preservation." Hobbes asserts that the basic impulse is the right of the individual; he calls it a "natural right." All men process this natural right equally. This theory leads Hobbes to believe man's natural state to be one of constant conflict with each other. This leads him to write the following quote he is most known for: "men's lives are solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." So as not to have to live in constant state of fear or conflict, men make a contract for protection with the state. Hobbes believes that the best state is one led by a single sovereign whose power must be unrestricted with all three branches of government devolving to him. A single sovereign who has absolute power and cannot be replaced by the people.

His political writing had immediate influence in the world and influences other philosophers like Spinoza, Hutcheson, Locke, and Hume. Hobbes is the first man to write about political philosophy in such methodical terms. He is an excellent writer and his theories are easy to understand by the laymen. As a graduate student of political philosophy, I recommend if you have an interest in politics, philosophy, or government then you must start with reading Hobbes "Leviathan."

Alright, Hobbes is not what you would call casual reading. If you like thick political philosophy, you may enjoy this though. Unlike most political works, you should not feel compelled to agree with everything Hobbes states, as it is quite a difficult sell. But he is very enjoyable, unless of coarse you are an eternal optimist or true-blue believer in democracy.

Although vilified by most for his extreme view of an all powerful head of state governing over the cruel and devilish populace, Hobbes creates a senerio that I think most would agree with in some way or form. People, left to their own devices, will inherently murder and steal from each other to the point that civilized life becomes unbearable. It's quite a world picture that Hobbes presents, and quite fascinating as well. The idea I believe Hobbes asks each person to explore is fundamental--what is the true nature of the individual? His answer in short is chilling--the individual is not to be trusted! While we can ask that education and high moral fiber dictate the peoples actions, do we really want to rely on the goodness of our neighbors, or do we want to keep a steady eye on them while holding fast to our sword?

While I find it hard to believe any person would call themselves a die-hard Hobbesian, I think most people will find themselves answering in agreement to much that he has to say. After all, even many of the founding fathers feared the impulses of the masses and sought refuge in a powerful central government to keep the monsters at bay. Here's a tip: keep short notes while you read. Don't get caught up in all the details, and you'll enjoy this book.

I won't go into a great deal of detail repeating what has already been said. In addition to the foregoing, a deep familiarity with this book is invaluable if you intend on studying political science in any serious manner-- either if you are an undergraduate poli-sci major and you intend on being noticed favorably by your professors, or-- needless to say-- you intend to do any post-graduate work in political science. I wasn't a philosophy major; but, if reading this book fails to improve your life, I'll double your money back.

I'm only half-kidding about that (well, more than half on the money part-- you aren't sending me any).

Personally, I was fascinated by Hobbes and I've always enjoyed reading; so... that's my disclaimer. I concede that it takes a little getting used to reading the archaic style; but, the truth of his statements and the way that they fell into place seemed to me just about as mathematical as such a subject could be. In the end, just the fact that I could demonstrate legitimate, intimate understanding of this book ultimately impressed the Hell out of no end of professors, etc.

Political science majors all ultimately meet the same folks: Descartes, Rousseau, Adam Smith, Plato, Socrates, Locke, Machiavelli, etc., and the more familiar you can be with them, the better. But, in my opinion, the one who had reality figured out was Hobbes. If you find a rabid Rousseau fan writing a similar review on "The Social Contract," I'm not going to slam the competitor's product-- but, if you only have time to wade into one tough read, I suggest that you make it this one.

*BUT* One bright, shining ray of hope for the over-burdened scholar is that I only recommend exerting yourself on Part I ("Of MAN"), which only constitutes 1/3 of the book. My personal (very) simplified synopsis is that Hobbes spends the first part of his book doing an excellent job describing the nature of essentially the broad spectrum of reality, most importantly Man and Power in its multitudinous forms and how that motivates Man in his selfish desire to garner it unto himself. Then, after essentially describing what a despicable creature man is after absolute power has corrupted absolutely, his recommendation is, incredibly, to hand over absolute power to one of those absolutely selfish creatures and toss a crown on his head. After Part I, I release you from your bondage. Feel free to read on-- in fact, I recommend it. But, if the style of prose is overwhelming to you, you are really prepared for whatever may come with a thorough understanding of "Of MAN."

Hobbes uses "Of MAN" as the pigments with which he attempts to paint a portrait of what society should be. If you have a real understanding of the materials with which he was working, you have what you need to understand his scheme, or to engineer a better one. I perceive the rest of Leviathan mostly as a basis for critiquing Hobbes-- which is of questionable practical value except as an academic. My first impression upon reading "Of MAN" was that I seemed to be reading the equivalent of an enormous geometry proof. I later found out that that was no coincidence. Hobbes had become fascinated with geometry, and sought to create a philosophy that began with inarguable facts and built to a model for society. I think he does brilliantly until he reaches the point at which his "Soveraign," which embodies society as agreed upon by its founding subjects, is made a single monarch, as he recommends, or a self-perpetuating assembly. In the case of a lone monarch, he depends too much upon the "Soveraign" on the throne not not being a Man on the throne. He expects him to do good because it is his role in society-- the Soveraign appears as a deus ex machina to solve the problems of managing his society, which may have been the best idea that could occur to him, but, given the hindsight from the 21st Century, the idea's weaknesses are obvious to us. Even in the case of an assembly, he allows for no means of course correction should the will of the "Soveraign" begin deviating from its original trajectory and cease to represent the will of the people. Considering that he was surrounded by nothing but monarchies in the 17th Century, I have to excuse the guy for not imagining a bi-cameral legislature, separate executive and legislative branches, etc. The United States didn't even establish the supremacy of its Supreme Court until Marbury v. Madison.

Personally, I believe that Hobbes is better than anyone else at explaining the nature of man and the nature of power. After that, budding social architects are cautioned AGAINST attaching the included "Commonwealth" pack. Obtain social architecture separately. Recommended: Declaration Of Independence, Constitution Of The United States Of America, Bill Of Rights And Constitutional Amendments

For those who dislike the archaic spelling in Hobbes, this edition with modernized text and spelling is the one for them. The opening sentence suffices to show the difference. The following is the original text:
"Concerning the Thoughts of man, I will consider them first Singly, and afterwards in Trayne, or dependence upon one another." (With Singly and Trayne in italics)
The modernized text in this edition is:
"Concerning the thoughts of man, I will consider them first singly, and afterwards in train, or dependence upon one another." (No italics)

There is a decent introduction by Gaskin, a bibliography, an index and explanatory notes, and this edition is very competitively priced.

As a student at Oxford I chose an optional paper "Political theory from Hobbes". It was "from Hobbes" because modern political philosophy begins with him. Before Hobbes, writers for centuries had accepted the divine right of kings or did not consider the origins of government. In Hobbes we find concepts that became standard in political thought: human nature, state of nature, social contract, absolute and limited government, civil disobedience, censorship, etc.

Hobbes supposes that organized society is a choice. The alternative is the "state of nature" with both a "right of nature" and "laws of nature", but Hobbes uses the terms in an idiosyncratic way. The "right of nature" is "the liberty each man has, to use his own power...for the preservation of his own life" and doing anything that is necessary to achieve this. In addition there are a number of "laws of nature". The first dictates that each person should seek to live with others in peace, and the second is that each person should only retain the right to as much liberty as he is willing to permit others. These (and other laws that follow from them) are found by reason and are utilitarian rather than prudential. Morality does not enter into it. Hobbes is simply saying that if men think about their situation, reason tells them that giving up their natural rights in exchange for others doing the same is the best means of self-preservation, even though this is contrary to human nature.

On human nature Hobbes is cynical. Men have the power of reason that suggests possible advantages of co-operation but this is outweighed by instinct. Men are competitive and selfish. They are also roughly equal in ability, so no one person or group can impose his will on others. Life in the state of nature is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short." Hence men are driven to create government via a pact in which all give up their natural rights to a sovereign authority, which may be either an individual or an oligarchy (Hobbes prefers the former). Hobbes uses the concept of a "social contract". It is not an historical event but a logical device to describe the ongoing basis of consent to government. Very importantly, Hobbes assigns absolute power to the sovereign. Limited government is unworkable, for men are too quarrelsome and selfish and "a kingdom divided against itself cannot stand." Hobbes was influenced by the divisive years preceding the English Civil War in which he lived. Among the ten rights Hobbes awards the sovereign the sixth is the power of censorship of opinions he deems harmful to the state. Control of religion is not among the ten rights but Hobbes later argues that the sovereign must seek to restrain discussion of religion because it is a source of conflict. As for anybody seeking to preach a new religion, he should be treated as a criminal. Hobbes was not a religious man but he could not avoid discussing the role of religion in the age in which he lived.

Are there circumstances in which people are justified in breaking the law, and is there an ultimate right of rebellion? The answer is to be found in the nature of the social contract. Men consent to an absolute ruler in order to better secure self-preservation. If a situation arises where the sovereign fails to achieve that then society is dissolved. On civil disobedience Hobbes observes that a criminal going to his execution retains his natural right to resist, but he is not saying it is a "moral" right, and in fact the sovereign is right to execute him. On conscription, Hobbes seems at first sight ambiguous because he declares that a man's natural right to protect his own life extends to refusing to die in military service if conscripted. However, further reading shows that the sovereign has the right to require people to risk their life if the existence of the state is threatened. On the other hand men should have the right to put a volunteer in their place (if one is available) and the sovereign does not have the right to demand the sacrifice of my life if the existence of the state is not threatened.

"Leviathan" is not an easy book, not helped by the fact that the English is that of a man born just 24 years after Shakespeare. However, it is an important work that makes a good study companion to Locke's "Second Treatise", which argues for limited government. Those who prefer the original to this modernized text have many choices, including the Macpherson edition.

Someone gave this great book and seminal work in political philosophy 2 stars just because it is "difficult to read". In fact, it is quite difficult to read. Partly because the Leviathan was written almost 400 years ago and partly because well, it is Hobbes. However, just because a book is hard to read does not mean that the content is bad or worthless. I would suggest the opposite, if our very simple thinking and poor intellectual abilities do not allow us to crack it open at the first attempt we should keep trying. That effort is what keep us moving forward.

Great book, needless to say. Take your time and enjoy. If it gets difficult just leave it on the table, think about it and read it later. This book is not your quick weekend read. It is a book with complex arguments and structure. Sit, read and ponder. Enjoy!

Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan was the first modern political theorem written in the English language. Poetry, essays, plays and a few academic analyses on Politics existed before that, but it was Hobbes who fathered modern political thought in all its rational and logical stipulation. It was Hobbes who questioned and fought the traditional notions of political understanding; nobody prior to Hobbes had ever cross-examined the foundations of a Monarchic structure within society and the genesis of government. In the introduction itself, Hobbes asserts his assumption that an organized state of life is a choice, just as chaos is a choice as well. He makes it clear in the start that nature predisposes everyone with certain rights and a prerequisite set of laws. Every man has a right to defend his life with all his ability and the law that nature imposes on every being is to live a life of peace and to treat others as one would like to be treated. He states that for self-preservation, man must bind himself in contract with other men to give up our birthrights to be protected by a collectively elected sovereign power. This sovereign power must have unconditional authority in every single aspect of life; there is no entity that boasts more strength or questions the elected sovereign power; everything else besides the sovereign is reigned by the sovereign.

According to Hobbes, the nature of man is motivated by his passions, and there is no greater and intense passion than fear. Fear triumphs over all other emotions and man's primal fear is of losing his life by force, which can even make him take irrational decisions. It is this logical prognosis of his that made him believe that whatever can go wrong, will go wrong, unless man follows the law of nature; to live in peace and preserve his life in unison with his fellow citizens. His cynicism for human nature is established when he states that the state of nature is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short". He says the only way to overcome the innate fear of death and the knowledge of the nature of human nature is to bind oneself in contract with the State so that everyone can be protected and life can go on without the pre-dominant instinctual fears that corrupt men into malice. Hobbes' approach to all his findings is very mechanical and stems from deductive reasoning. And as no arguments and understanding prior to him existed in the field of his discourse, a majority of his conclusions are axiomatic in definition. Because he wants his audience to think with the same rationality that he commands, Hobbes explains in microscopic detail the machinations of human civilization, beginning with an acute explanation of Man and his senses. He geometrically divides and disassembles our understanding of ourselves and then chauffeurs us to a perspective change that is required to comprehend all Hobbesian deduction.

While the twenty first century's modern man might question Hobbes' reasoning behind granting all power to the "State", one must have an understanding of the epistemology of the Hobbesian thought that stemmed from an elongated suffering due to prolonged war, which arose due to the weakness in the Government that commanded during his youth. Thus, to evade the chaos of civil disagreement, Hobbes yields his logic and grants all existing power and importance to one sole entity. He grants power to the sovereign to literally do anything without any repercussions and also grants it an authority higher than that of God. All this is done because the sovereign is the selected representative of the whole population of his state, making this sole source of power also a theoretical manifestation of the state. This concept of the all-powerful state, an entity that embodies the constituency of all its citizens, officials and the sovereign power collectively is called the Leviathan; A form of a living and breathing beast that nothing in this world can oppose. Hobbes states that the existence of such a state is imperative to subdue all its' subjects in obedience, because fear is the only emotion a human being will submit to unconditionally, especially whence it is from a behemoth to the likes of a Leviathan.

Hobbes' diction and grammatology is an arduous passage to cross, but the ideas and theories he is postulating required him to twist his words in his times' verbatim. One must always acknowledge the colloquial dialect of the English language Hobbes' time nurtured him with. He creates layers of ideas upon layers of laws that are meant to take the reader to precise conclusions. The purpose of his loquacity is to reach at one sole conclusion only, and that is what makes Leviathan a timeless study of logic.

It is quiet evident that even after five centuries of radical polarization in the perception of government and politics, Leviathan still stands like the name of the entity it bears. It was this book that inspired almost all political theoreticians for many centuries to come. Students and admirers of both liberal and conservative political thought will benefit from reading Leviathan.

I got interested in Hobbes because I was reading a lot about the Founding Fathers of the United States and I wanted to familiarize myself with the books that influenced them.

Reading Leviathan is not easy. It requires a lot of concentration. I found it helpful to read the Wikipedia explanation of the book before reading the book itself.

However, the book is brilliant if you take away the religious part of it and focus on the ideas that are based upon reason.

You can almost feel humanity (or part of humanity, anyway) waking up at this time in history to figure out what government is actually supposed to be.

John Christmas, author of "Democracy Society"

This was a book that I downloaded to my phone. I got an amazon kindle app for my android for free, and then found this for free! It's awesome to have a book at the go to read when I have some down time :)