Leviathan is a book written by the English philosopher Hobbes. Here is a brief introduction to the main contents of this book, I hope you like it!
Introduction to the work:
165 1 year, Thomas Hobbes, a political thinker during the British bourgeois revolution, published his book Leviathan, named after the monster Leviathan, which was intended to be a metaphor for a powerful country, in order to demonstrate the supremacy of the monarch and oppose the "divine right of the monarch". Legend has it that after God created man, man asked God, "God, we are so weak. Please create another hero and let him protect us. " God said, "while protecting you, heroes will oppress you and eat you." Later, in order to resist all kinds of external risks, people created a leviathan and created a behemoth that could make them feel a sense of belonging-the government, but the leviathan of the government has a dual personality. It is made up of people and operated by people, so it is half-god and half-beast. It protects people and eats people at the same time. So the highest ideal of human society is to keep Leviathan in a cage.
Content introduction:
To people
Hobbes' book begins with a discussion of human nature. He described a person as a constantly changing thing, and he tried to point out through examples that everything about people can be presented in a materialistic way, that is, it exists in people's minds, intangible souls or abilities without resorting to anything else. Hobbes then explicitly defined the term. Good and evil are only terms used to describe a person's preferences and desires, and these preferences and desires are only the tendency to approach or stay away from an object. He pointed out that scholasticism, the most influential political theology at that time, flourished because many daily expressions were confused, such as the word "intangible matter", which was a contradiction in terms for Hobbes.
Hobbes did not mention "Summum Bonum" when describing human psychology, which was an authoritative opinion in the past. Not only is the concept of "supreme goodness" redundant, but from the perspective of the variability of human desires, it is impossible to have such a thing. Therefore, any political entity that wants to provide the best interests for its members will be divided by this goal, because no one can decide what the best interests are. The result will be civil war.
But Hobbes pointed out that there is "summum malum", that is, the greatest evil exists. This is the fear of violent death. Political identity can be built on this fear.
Since there is no "supreme goodness", people in the natural state will not form a political group that pursues the greatest interests. But outside of political unity, it is an anarchy. In view of the variability of human nature and desires, and the demand for scarce resources to satisfy these desires, Hobbes' natural state must be a bellum omnium contra omnes, that is, a war between all people. Even if two people don't fight, there is no guarantee that one of them won't try to kill the other because of his own property or some wronged sense of honor, so he must be constantly wary of the other party. It makes sense to even attack your neighbors first.
"Therefore, what happens when everyone is an enemy during the war will also happen when people can only rely on their own physical strength and creativity to ensure their lives. In this case, industry cannot exist because its results are unstable. In this way, land cultivation, navigation, the use of imported goods from other countries, comfortable buildings, tools for handling and unloading objects that require great effort, geomorphological knowledge, recording time, literature, literature, society, etc. will not exist. "
Worst of all, people are constantly in danger of fear and violent death. People's lives are lonely, poor, dirty, cruel and short. Therefore, how to avoid the natural state has become the core of political thinking. This idea is often closely related to the idea of natural law, but Hobbes believes that this should not be called "law" because no one can have the ability to implement it. Human reason is most concerned about seeking peace, but when peace cannot be achieved, they will think about how to get the maximum benefit through war. Hobbes clearly pointed out that there is no justice in the state of nature, and everyone can claim to have everything. The second rule of natural law is that anyone should give up the idea of having everything, and when others are willing to do so, so as to stay away from the natural state and establish a * * * Republic with the right to rule these affairs. Hobbes summed up the first part, pointed out that another 17 can implement the above two principles of natural law, and answered what the sovereignty of a sovereign country means when its people disagree with its existence.
On the state
The second part discusses the purpose of the existence of the country at the beginning: "We see that human beings who are born to love freedom and rule others live in the country and bind themselves. Their ultimate motivation, purpose or attempt is to save themselves in this way and get a more satisfactory life; In other words, we should get rid of the tragic situation of war. As explained in chapter 8, when there is no tangible power to make people fear and restrain them from fulfilling their promises and abide by the laws of nature listed in chapters 14 and 15, this state of war is the inevitable result of human natural passion. " This country is established as follows: "Everyone says to everyone else: I recognize this person or this collective, and give up the right to manage myself and give it to this person or this collective, but only if you also give your rights to him and recognize all his actions in the same way." Sovereignty 12 main rights:
Because they sent a letter, it means that they are no longer bound by any old letter to the contrary. In this way, people who have established a country according to the contract must recognize someone's behavior and judgment. According to the law, without this person's permission, they can't conclude a new contract between them and obey anyone else in anything.
Because the person they push as the sovereign assumes the right of everyone's personality, it is only granted by their mutual Covenant, not by any of them, so the sovereign will not violate the Covenant; In this way, his subjects can't relieve their obedience to him on the pretext of canceling sovereignty.
Since most people declare sovereignty by mutual consent, the original opponents must agree with others at this time; In other words, he must be willing to announce that he admits all the actions of this monarch, otherwise others will have a legitimate reason to kill him.
Since every subject is the authorizer of all actions and judgments of the sovereign established according to the contract after the country is established according to the contract, it can be concluded that nothing done by the sovereign can infringe on any subject, and there is no reason for anyone among the subjects to accuse him of injustice, because when a person does anything according to the authorization of another person, he cannot infringe on the authorizer in this matter.
According to the above reasons, it is unfair to execute a monarch or to impose other punishments on him by his subjects in any way.
Deciding which theories and opinions are harmful to peace, which are beneficial to peace, who to trust when speaking to the people under what circumstances and to what extent, and reviewing all books before publication are all matters within the scope of sovereignty. Therefore, the monarch has the right to examine opinions and theories, or appoint all examiners, and regard this as a necessary thing for peace to prevent disputes and civil wars.
Sovereignty also includes all the following powers, that is, making rules so that everyone knows what property he can enjoy and what behavior he can do, and no other subject can interfere.
Judicial power also belongs to the scope of sovereignty. This is the right to hear and decide all disputes and related facts between secular law and natural law.
The right to declare war and make peace with other countries and nations is also a right within the scope of sovereignty.
In peacetime and wartime, the right to choose and elect all members of parliament, ministers, local governors and officials also belongs to the scope of sovereignty.
Among the powers granted to the monarch, there is also the right to grant titles and titles to every subject, as well as the right to impose corporal punishment, fines and honorary punishment according to the laws he has formulated in advance.
There must be laws and regulations for honorary titles, and there must be an open scale to measure the value of people who have made meritorious service to the country or those who have talent to make meritorious service to the country; In addition, some people must have the right to enforce these laws.
Hobbes explicitly opposed the idea of separation of powers, just like the separation of powers in the later American Constitution. The sixth part may be neglected in the past. He advocates media censorship and opposes freedom of speech as long as it is harmful to sovereign rule. "There are two ways of jurisdiction: one is based on the way passed down from generation to generation, and the other is through conquest." 162 the former is called patriarchal jurisdiction and the latter is called authoritarian jurisdiction.
Country type
There are three types of countries (monarchy, aristocracy and democracy).
The difference between countries lies in the difference of the sovereign, that is, the difference of the people who represent the whole public and everyone among them. The rules are not in the hands of one person, but in the hands of a meeting composed of many people. However, the meeting is not for everyone, or not for everyone, but for some people who are different. Therefore, we can clearly see that there are only three kinds of countries. Because the representative must be one or more people. If there are many people, it is either a meeting of all people or a meeting of some people. When there is only one representative, the country is a monarchy. If all the people meet together, it is a democratic country or a civilian country. If only some people meet, it is called an aristocratic country.
Only three:
There can be no other countries. Because sovereignty can never be held by one person, it must be held by many people, or an inseparable whole held by all, as I explained earlier. There are other names of regimes in history and politics books, such as tyrant regimes and oligarchy regimes. But these are not the names of other forms of government, but only the names of the same type of government when it is hated. Because under the monarchy, those who are dissatisfied are called tyrant regimes, while those who are dissatisfied with aristocratic regimes are called oligarchy regimes. By the same token, people who are dissatisfied in a democratic system are called anarchy, which means anarchy. But I don't think anyone will believe that no government is a new government. By the same token, people should not think of a government as one when they like it, and think of it as another when they don't like it or are oppressed by the rulers.
In fact, the monarchy is the best:
The difference between these three countries lies not in their strength, but in the way to achieve peace and people's security (the purpose of establishing a country according to the agreement). If we compare the monarchy with the other two regimes, we can see: first, no matter who undertakes the people's personality or becomes a member of the conference who undertakes the people's personality, he also has his own identity as a natural person. Although his political identity is concerned with public interests, he will pay more attention to the private interests of himself and his family and relatives. In most cases, when public and private interests conflict, he will put personal interests first, because people's feelings are generally more powerful than reason. From this point, we can draw a conclusion that where public interests and private interests are most closely combined, public interests are also promoted to the greatest extent. In a monarchy, private interests and public interests are the same thing. The wealth, power and honor of monarch can only come from the wealth, power and honor of people. Because if the subjects become poor, mean or weak because of poverty and fragmentation, so that they can't defend against the enemy, the monarch can't be rich, glorious and safe. However, in a democratic or aristocratic regime, public prosperity often does not bring treacherous advice, deception or civil war to the private wealth of corrupt or ambitious people. [2]
inherit
Inheritance is always closely related to sovereignty. Democracy and aristocratic inheritance are relatively simple, while monarchy is relatively difficult:
On the issue of inheritance, the biggest difficulty occurred in the monarchy. This difficulty arises because at first glance, it is not clear who will designate the successor, and in many cases, it is not clear who the successor he designates is. Because in both cases, the reasoning that needs to be used is stricter than the reasoning that everyone is used to.
Because most people don't think about it carefully now. However, the right of inheritance is absolutely the natural right of the monarch:
The question of who will designate an heir to a sovereign monarch is really bad (because the elected king and prince have no sovereign ownership, only the right to use). What we should consider is that either the current king has the right to stipulate the right of inheritance or this right will be returned to the disorderly and undisciplined masses. Because in this case: after the death of a sovereign owner, there is no sovereignty left to the masses, that is, there is no representative left for them to be unified on him so that they can make any unified action, so they can't elect any new monarch; In this way, everyone has the equal right to submit to those who he thinks can best protect him; If possible, he will defend himself with his own weapons, that is, return to the state of chaos and the state of war between people, which runs counter to the purpose of establishing a monarchy. Therefore, we can clearly see that once the monarchy is established according to the contract, it will always leave the issue of heirs to the current king according to the judgment and will of the current king.
But who appoints the king is not always certain: the answer is:
Sometimes the question arises who the incumbent king designates to inherit his power. This question can be decided according to his explicit language and will, or according to other sufficient implications.
This means:
When he was alive, he announced it orally or in writing through clear language or will, just as the first emperor of Rome announced their heirs.
It should be noted that there is no blood relationship:
Because the word heir itself does not refer to the heir's children or close relatives, but only to anyone who declares in any way that he should inherit his identity. Therefore, if a king clearly declares in oral or written form that someone will be his heir, then this person has the right to become king immediately after the death of the former king.
However, in fact, this represents:
But where there is no will or clear words, we must follow other natural expressions representing will, one of which is habit. Therefore, where it is customary to say that the nearest relative should inherit the throne, the nearest relative has the right to inherit. Because the incumbent king didn't want to, it was easy for him to announce it when he was alive.
So in reality, we will choose the eldest son first.
religion
In Leviathan, Hobbes clearly pointed out that sovereignty has the right to interfere with religious beliefs and doctrines, and if he does not do so, it will lead to disputes. Hobbes put forward his own religious theory, but pointed out that he would obey the will of sovereignty (when sovereignty was re-established, readers were reminded that Leviathan was written during the civil war), regardless of whether the sovereignty theory was reasonable or not. Tucker believes that this shows that Hobbes is a supporter of the religious policy of the Republic after the religious war.
tax system
Hobbes also discussed the issue of sovereign taxation, but his economic theory was not as valued as his political theory. Hobbes believes that correct equality also includes tax equality. The equality of tax system is not based on the equality of wealth, but on his efforts to safeguard and maintain national laws. Hobbes also supports that the state should help those who can't stand on their own feet, which is paid from state taxes.
About the author:
Thomas Hobbes (1588- 1679), an Englishman, is one of the most important political philosophers in the west. He thought deeply about the basic problems of state and law. His major works include Leviathan and On Citizens. His Leviathan has extraordinary logic and imagination, which makes political philosophy play a logical and systematic role and become a world-famous work.
Thought of works
Leviathan refers to a powerful marine animal, which Hobbes used to describe a country with absolute monarchy. This book mainly discusses the author's national origin theory and social and political thoughts. He believes that self-preservation and pursuit of happiness are human nature, but they cannot be realized in the "natural state" where everyone is enemies. In order to get rid of this state, people made a contract, and the country was born. He advocated absolute monarchy and emphasized that kingship was higher than religious power. In addition, he expounded his materialist epistemology and exposed the harm of scholasticism and religious superstition.
Hobbes believes that people are born equal and free, so the natural state of people is called the state of enjoying full natural rights. "Nature makes people very equal physically and mentally", and there is no such phenomenon in the world to express the equal distribution of talents. Because people are equal in ability, they will become enemies. In order to realize their wishes, people try to control or conquer others, suspect each other and fight with each other. Secondly, beginning of life is evil, and there are constant disputes. Hobbes said: "in human nature, we find that there are three main reasons for fighting. The first is competition, the second is suspicion, and the third is honor." Because of these disputes. It will lead to endless looting and even bloody slaughter. This is how the famous saying "man is like a wolf to man" was derived. He concluded that man's natural state is "a state of war in which everyone opposes everyone". Nothing is unfair in a war where everyone is the enemy. Because there was no public power at that time, there was no justice without law. Although people in the natural state are equal and absolutely free, it is undoubtedly a tragic natural state. Of course, Hobbes doesn't think that this natural state really exists universally, but he just takes it as a theoretical deduction.
Hobbes emphasized that in order to prevent mankind from being wiped out by killing each other, "peace must be sought and observed". What can make human beings try their best to get out of the natural state is the universal law based on rationality-natural law, which is used to limit everyone's natural rights based on nature and instinct in order to maintain peace and order. Hobbes said: "Natural law is a discipline or general law discovered by reason, which prohibits people from doing things that destroy their own lives or deprive them of the means to save their lives", and the central point of its natural law is individualism of "self-preservation". Hobbes' main purpose is to discuss how human beings enter the social and political state from the natural state, that is, how to enter the peaceful state from the state of war. To this end, he put forward fourteen principles of natural law, which can be summarized as "Don't do to others what you don't want others to do to you". He concluded that the principles and contents of natural law can be observed by people and will never change. Because the fundamental principle and purpose of natural law is "seeking peace", and peace is necessary for people to satisfy their own desires and cannot be changed.
Although natural law plays an adjusting role in the natural state, in order to get rid of the hostile situation between people, human beings must seek public power that can make everyone feel fear and guide their actions in order to seek common interests. Social contract is the only way for human beings to get out of the natural state. By concluding a contract, people entrust all the power and strength of each person to a group of one or more people. This collective can convert everyone's will into will through majority opinion. Therefore, people transfer their natural rights to a ruler to dominate and manage, establish a kind of public power between them, and avoid endless struggle. According to this contract, they will transition from a natural state to a social state, thus forming a country.
;