Thomas Hobbes vs. Immanuel Kant Essay - 1715 Words

Thomas Hobbes Vs. Immanuel Kant PART 1: Thomas Hobbes â€Å"Everyone is governed by his own reason, and there is nothing he can make use of that may not be a help unto him in preserving his life against his enemies (Hobbes, 120).† Thomas Hobbes, who is a considered a rational egoist, makes this point in his book Leviathan. Hobbes believes that the means of person’s actions can only be amounted to how it ultimately affects that person. Our moral duties that we perform in the end, all stem from self-interest, rather than being justified as morally right or wrong. Hobbes states that our desires pit us against one another, and the only way to protect our self-interests is to create a common power that protects the people who consent to it.†¦show more content†¦Therefore using anything at your disposal as a means would have no moral worth. â€Å"It is not enough that the action does not conflict with humanity in our person as an ends in itself; it must also harmonize with it†(Kant, 113). People must act not acco rding inclinations or rules, but it involves performing acts that have no gains for us, and that is the only way to preserve humanity. Although Kant agrees with Hobbes that a state of nature does exist without proper authority, he counters, saying it does not exist because everyone is acting out of duty. Stating self-interest is the motivation for our actions and ultimate end conflicts with the principle of forming a covenant to protect our self-interests. We would still be in a state of nature, due the â€Å"fool† who does not obey his covenant. Thusly, making a covenant out of self-interest can lead to people in society breaking this contract or making empty promises, as a result of later gains they may receive by not abiding. Instead, when acting out of duty â€Å"I must reflect carefully whether this lie (broken covenant) may later give rise to much greater inconvenience (Kant, 107),† which ultimately can harm our inclination to self-preserve. Before one can act they must ask the question would they want others to act in that manner? This sets a maxim for each individual to follow, so a covenant is formed that society will not break because it our duty, and acting out of from thisShow MoreRelatedJohn Stuart Mill And Thomas Hobbes1128 Words   |  5 Pagessignificance of Berlin’s bisection. When looking through history it is quite easy to see that philosophers such as John Stuart Mill and Thomas Hobbes are talking about very different things than Immanuel Kant and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Hobbes proclaims, â€Å"Liberty, or freedom, signifieth properly the absence of opposition (by opposition, I mean external impediments of motion)†¦Ã¢â‚¬  (Hobbes 136). While Mill describes liberty as â€Å"that of pursuing our own good in our own way† (Mill 14). Undoubtedly, these are both negativeRead MoreCategorical Vs. Categorical Imperative1929 Words   |  8 Pagesgood if there is â€Å"a means to do something else†. (Landau-Kant 93) An example of a hypothetical imperative would be to do an action in order to achieve a specific result. On the other hand, if an action itself is considered good and has no reason towards it, then it would be a categorical imperative. A categorical imperative would be doing a specific action because one is told to do so without any desire or happiness as a result. (Landau-Kant 93) In addition, both hypothetical and categorical imperativesRead MoreThe Philosophy Of Human Nature1534 Words   |  7 Pagesnever despair of human nature.† In Chinese culture, too, humans had long been considered to be essentially good, under the idealistic doctrines of Confucius and Mencius. In the West, however, many scholars, most notably including John Locke and Thomas Hobbes, suggested that the innate human condition was selfish and competitive. French philosopher, Rene Descartes expanded on Plato’s ideas by construing people as â€Å"thinking spirits†, while German philosopher, Karl Marx, implied that human nature wasRead MoreCleanth Brookss Essay Irony as a Principle of Structure9125 Words   |  37 Pa gesas a ‘dead dog’, and this despite the fact that in the universities he has once again become persona grata and even fashionable. What would Professor Vorlà ¤nder say if a historian of philosophy contrived not to notice — in the works of a successor of Kant, however critical and original, that the ‘synthetic unity of apperception’, to take but one instance, was derived from the Critique of Pure Reason? The author of these pages wishes to break with such views. He believes that today it is of practicalRead MoreSources of Ethics20199 Words   |  81 Pages3- PHILOSOPHICAL: 55 2.31- Contribution Of In Ethics By The Source Of Philosophical Systems: 55 2.32- Contribution of Aristotle: 57 2.33- Contributions By Other Important Philosophers: 58 2.34- Rights Theory: 64 2.35- Contribution By KANT: 65 2.36- Contribution By ROSS: 66 2.4- CULTURAL: 68 2.5- LEGAL SYSTEM: 71 2.6- CODES OF ETHICS: 74 2.61- Company Codes: 74 Code of ethics (corporate or business ethics) 74 code of ethics(business of ethics) 75 Code of conductRead MoreOrganisational Theory230255 Words   |  922 PagesTable 9.1 Table 9.2 Table 9.3 Table 10.1 Table 10.2 Knowledge constituting philosophical assumptions Hierarchy of science and organization theory Fatalism and optimism in the ‘new’ modernist organization Bell’s stages of societal development Fordism vs. post-fordism The incidence of part-time work in European Union member states Modernism versus postmodernism Affirmative versus sceptical postmodernism The changing condition of knowledge Pay and profits: Long run performance of FTSE 100 companies (2002