A Natureza Humana

by Thomas Hobbes

The founding father of modern political philosophy, Thomas Hobbes, living in an era of horrific violence, saw human life as meaningless and cruel; here, he argues the only way to escape this brutality is for all to accept a 'social contract' that acknowledges the greater authority of a Sovereign leader.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Classics, Politics, Political Science, British Literature, 17th Century

158 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1658

About the author

Thomas Hobbes was a British philosopher and a seminal thinker of modern political philosophy. His ideas were marked by a mechanistic materialist foundation, a characterization of human nature based on greed and fear of death, and support for an absolute monarchical form of government. His 1651 book Leviathan established the foundation for most of Western political philosophy from the perspective of social contract theory.

He was also a scholar of classical Greek history and literature, and produced English translation of Illiad, Odyssey and History of Peloponnesian War.

Reviews

[Jack · Rating 2 out of 5]

Found this a really tiresome read, despite the relatively short length. Maybe my fault for choosing an inebriated holiday with friends as a the time to tackle it. The fogginess of my mind seemed to combine with Hobbes fogginess of explanation to create the most impenetrable foggiest of fogs.

I'm aware we can't judge past writers by their failure to produce a writing clarity that the 21st Century reader can vibe off. But old Tom really should have been thinking of 2020-me when he wrote this. That is, if he wanted me to care about his endless defintions of words that didn't appear to need to be defined.

I'm sure it was well-recieved at the time & that Leviathan (the full works) is a groundbreaking tome, but Social Contract (which was a truly superb idea) aside, this one passed me by.

Another gripe I have with the Great Ideas/Little Classics books. They always seem like a fantastic idea, but it just ends up feeling like you've read a tasteless version of the real thing. Like a the faintest tinge of Summer Fruits in a hefty glass of water. No doubt I'll forget this next time I see one and be romatically induced by the idea once more.

P.S. Feels like I needed to get that review out my system - the next will be more positive!

[Willy Akhdes · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found this tiny book as one of the best compilation of great ideas about human. Thomas Hobbes, as one of leading modern philosopher, articulates his arguments in such beautiful way. He stated that human should think and build humane society which differ us from animals.

[Francisco Duque de Almeida · Rating 4 out of 5]

Uma Filosofia Natural e Empirista de Hobbes que se constitui na Paixão e na Razão do Homem.

Da Paixão e da Razão, procedem dois tipos de saber: o matemático e o dogmático. O primeiro consiste na comparação de figuras e movimentos, o que resulta a verdade e exclui as controvérsias; o segundo é muito discutível, porque compara a razão entre os Homens. E se "a razão estiver contra um Homem, ele, por sua vez, estará contra a razão", criando, assim, as opiniões falsas e, portanto, contraditórias.

FACULDADES NATURAIS DO HOMEM

"A natureza do Homem é a soma das suas faculdades e poderes tais como as faculdades de nutrição, de movimento, de geração, de sensação, de razão, etc. Unanimemente chamamos de naturais a estes poderes, e eles estão contidos na definição de Homem mediante estas palavras: animal e racional."

SENSAÇÕES

"O sujeito ao qual são inerentes a cor e a imagem, não é o objecto ou a coisa vista; aquilo que chamamos uma imagem ou cor, não é realmente nada fora de nós.

A referida imagem ou cor é apenas uma aparição em nós daquele movimento, agitação, ou alteração, que o objecto provoca no cérebro ou nos espíritos, ou em alguma substância interna da cabeça.

Tanto na concepção pela visão como nas concepções que provêm de outros sentidos, o sujeito da sua inerência não é o objecto, mas aquele que sente.

A cor e a imagem podem estar onde a coisa vista não está, como, por exemplo, o reflexo do Sol na água e em vidros."

(...)

[Laurent Dv]

C'est le deuxième opus des Eléments de la philosophie de Hobbes où il traite de l'homme, son langage (le différencie des animaux qui n'ont que des sons et n'emploient pas de signes arbitraires), ses passions, ses vertus et vices, de ses devoirs envers Dieu (la religion naturelle) et d'optique (au moins deux-tiers du livre parle plutôt de science). C'est la partie la plus tardive, publiée après la première et la troisième parties sur les corps et sur l'Etat. Hobbes semble avoir changé au moins un peu ses avis : un nominalisme plus léger comme il parle de concepts, il parle de l'âme humaine avec moins de problèmes, etc.

Attention, il semble que cette édition Vrin n'est qu'en latin. J'ai lu l'édition assez vieille de la Librairie scientifique et technique Albert Blanchard, De Homine Traité de l'homme avec la traduction et commentaire de Paul-Marie Maurin (trouvable dans les sites marchands sur internet). Les caractères ne sont pas trop petits mais pas si grands que ça. L'introduction et les notes sont copieuses même si le commentateur soutient que Hobbes ne se croyait pas vraiment chrétien, ce qui peut être contester (pour ma part je pense qu'il était un chrétien libéral, "non orthodoxe").

[Atrona Grizel (Sov8840)]

Cioran says: “Beware of those who have turned their backs on ambition, on love, and on society: they will take revenge for having renounced them.” To be loved would shatter my entire ontological outlook and inner philosophy, causing my ghostly identity to slip from my grasp, for it demands a shared reality, which is disgusting to my compromise-allergic cognition. As for society, it is not merely that I dislike or renounce it; for me, civillization does not even exist. What remains is ambition—but I doubt I am bound closely enough to humanity to carry an ambition for revenge. Even Cioran, when writing about mental exile, still used the word “we,” because he was speaking to humans. But such a “we” does not exist for me, nor does “I.” For I possess nothing outside myself—or even myself. To have rendered this planet and the universe utterly unreal or surreal, and thereby abolished the desire and need for vengeance—for one cannot fire at a dream: if that is to be counted as “revenge,” then I must be the most ferocious avenger.

[Aamina · Rating 3 out of 5]

Hobbes outlines his argument that without a sovereign, and common power to keep man in awe, man will be in a condition of War.

‘And the life of man, solitary, poore, nasty, brutish and short.’

Hobbes directs his speech to those who consider his view of man to be pessimistic, exposing how, though many are perhaps not conscience of it, they too view man in a dim light:

‘Let him therefore consider with himself ,when taking a journey, he armes himself, and seeks to go well accompanied; when going to sleep, he locks his dores; when even in his house he locks his chests; ......What opinion he has of his fellow subjects, when he rides armed; of his fellow citizens, when he locks his dores; and of his children, and servants, when he locks his chests. Does he not there as much accuse mankind by his actions, as I do by my words?’

[Colleen · Rating 3 out of 5]

I'm not quite sure why this is considered such a classic. He basically spends a lot of time defining things (that don't seem like they need defining, e.g., memory and imagination) and then goes on to say that we will descend into lawlessness (war) without government. So it's the government that keeps the peace, both at a global level and at a local level. There are certainly examples of this in failed nations, and there are counterexamples of people doing amazingly generous things during times of war (hiding Jews in Nazi Germany). This is probably more interesting if it's compared directly to the work of other philosophers; on its own it kind of provokes a 'yeah, sure' kind of reaction.

[Andy Barbur · Rating 5 out of 5]

Illuminante come nessuno prima di lui, egualmente chiaro e soprattutto imprescindibile per capire la composizione del mondo e del nostro posto come cittadini all’interno di uno Stato, validi ancora oggi ; per non cadere nella falsa credenza di un burattinaio malvagio che ci inganna. Sono emozionatissimo

[Cat · Rating 2 out of 5]

I have a soft spot for Hobbes owing to the fact that I recently wrote a paper on his views regarding political authority but that doesn't negate the fact that I found his obsession with definitions and conjectures very monotonous.

[Graham Clark · Rating 3 out of 5]

A few chapters taken from Leviathan. In the context of the English Civil War, a strong authoritarian leader probably seemed like a great idea, but in these excerpts at least, there's little thought to things going too far the other way. Glad we've all come to our senses about that nowadays!

[Khadija Anfradi · Rating 2 out of 5]

Un livre philosophique !

Il m'a attiré au début du livre l'introduction de DENIS DIDEROT qui a couvert presque un tiers de tout l'ouvrage juste pour parler de la vie de Hobbes, ses voyages et les évènements passés dans sa vie, et cela était très lourd de le suivre jusqu'à sa fin surtout que le lecteur ne peut pas comprendre de quoi le livre va parler par la suite, je parle bien évidement de l'édition traduise de l'anglais en français par le baron D'Holbach.

Hobbes a essayé à travers ce livre de décrire les comportements humains à travers l'explication des concepts utilisés tel que : La conception, les sentiments, l'imagination, le sommeil, les rêves, les marques, les appellations, le raisonnement, la science, la vérité, le plaisir, le sens, la gloire, la charité, la sensualité, la stupidité, la divinité ... et d'autres concepts dont la valeur qu'a donnée Hobbes est différenciée selon l'importance de chaque concept pour lui.

J'avais l'idée que Hobbes est très célèbre, et que je trouverais des centaines de personnes qui ont lu et commenté cet ouvrage, mais il apparait que personne ne s’intéresse à la philosophie de Hobbes.

Généralement le livre n'est pas du tout intéressant.

[Seamusin]

I like Thomas Hobbes. Fairly like his contemporary Descartes, investigating all systems around himself, but without the heavy predisposition for god. Besides the social contract, already here are the seeds of much else that is to come, and be chiefly attributed to others: physical explanation for the body, denying of any inherent meaning to life, denying a solution to the first-cause problem, and denying absolute good and evil. There are some pretty rambly bits, where commas and semi-colons have a dance together, but altogether pretty clear writing for the 16th century (No excuses, Locke!). A bit of wit here and there too! His last words apparently were: "A great leap in the dark".

I shall return to read the whole Leviathan when my attention shifts to the development of politics (Machiavelli, Locke, Rousseau). In that he shall argue for absolute monarchy, which I will

[Ana · Rating 4 out of 5]

Writing after a bloody civil war, Hobbes had no illusions about the worst in mankind, but saw how the good in us could prevent all an out and permanent war. People need a ruler just as much as a ruler needs his people.

"In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain, and consequently no culture of the earth, no navigation nor the use of commodities that may be imported by sea, no commodious building, no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force, no knowledge of the face of the earth, no account of time, no arts, no letters, no society, and which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."

[Alan · Rating 4 out of 5]

If this were not an abridged version of a greater text, I would have given it five stars. Of Man details the fundamental laws of running a complex society with, in the case of this abridgment, an emphasis on seeing the state as 'of man' in body and mind. Hobbes works through religious, economic, and philosophical logic in order to show how "where there is no law there is chaos" and that without a 'sovereign', mankind is doomed to live a "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short' life. There are a lot of other things going on here, mostly to do with how the state can get corrupted. Definitely recommended to anyone interested in law, philosophy or political science. I can't wait to read Leviathan.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

Studied this for a university module. While some of Hobbes's ontological views seem a bit simplistic, his cynical and brutally honest view of humanity and the human condition without a social contract binding us together in communal agreement is fascinating. And even though I firmly disagree with his conclusion - that absolute monarchy is the best way forward for society - his reasoning, when put into historical context, is well founded and reasonable.

[David Petersen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Among other things, an intriguing attempt to understand nuanced and sophisticated emotions in terms of more basic impulses (approach versus retreat).

[AJ Parsons · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read for class