تفسیر هابز از سرشت انسان و تأثیر آن در شکل‌گیری فلسفة سیاسی او

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی- پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشیار دانشگاه تبریز

2 دانشیار فلسفه غرب دانشگاه علامه طباطبائی

3 دکتری فلسفه، دانشگاه تبریز

چکیده

بنیان اندیشه سیاسیِ هابز بر تحلیل دوگانه وی از انسان مبتنی است: از سویی انسان به مثابة جسمِ مادیِ مرکب در شبکه­ای از نیروهای مکانیکی که تابع امیال و انفعالات خویش­ است. و از دیگر سو انسان همچون موضوع مطالعه مفاهیم حق و تکلیف که به وسیله قرارداد تشکیل اجتماع می­دهند. تلاش هابز بر این است که نظام سیاسی­اش با تحلیل ماده­گرایی از رفتار انسان سازگار باشد. به همین دلیل در اندیشه هابز آگاهی از سازمان سیاسی مشروط به شناخت سرشت بشری است، و شناخت حالات و انفعالات بشر به شناخت اصول مکانیکی و قوانین فیزیک وابسته است. اخلاق و سیاست هابز نیز با ماده­انگاری مکانیکی منطبق هستند و گاهی بر همان زمینه شرح و بسط داده شده­اند. پرسش­های راهبر  ما در این مقاله عبارتند از: سرشت انسان به مثابه یکی از عناصر اصلی نظام روان­شناختی هابز چه مختصاتی دارد؟ هابز چگونه بر پایة مختصات سرشت انسان، فلسفة سیاسی خود را تدوین کرده است؟ مدعای اصلی مقاله این است که در نگاه هابز سرشت انسان بر اصل حرکت و بر اصول مکانیکی استوار است و در نتیجه، توانایی ایجاد جامعه سیاسی در سرشت بشر نوشته نشده است. انسان مدنی­بالقسر است و باید اجتماع­پذیر ساخته شود، به این معنا که  نظم جامعه سیاسی نه نظمی طبیعی بلکه نظمی تصنعی است که در مفاد بندهای یک قرارداد تجلی­پذیر خواهد بود. بنابراین روان­شناسی مکانیکی هابز زمینه­ساز فلسفه مدنی اوست.

تازه های تحقیق

Hobbes Interpretation of Human Nature and Its Effect on the Formation of His Political Philosophy

Mostafa Shahraini 1 Yosef Nozohour 2 Beyan Karimi 3

[1]. Associate Professor of Philosophy, Tabriz University, Iran, Tabriz. m-shahraeini@tabrizu.ac.ir

2 . Associate Professor of Philosophy, Allameh Tabataba’i University, Iran, Tehran. Nozouhor@atu.ac.ir

3. Ph.D. in Philosophy, Tabriz University, Iran, Tabriz. karimibaian@gmail.com

 

Extended Abstract:

Hobbes political thought is based on his twofold analysis of mankind: Human being, on one hand, as a composed material body in the network of mechanical forces follows his desires and passions. He, on the other hand, studies the concepts of right and duty in order to establish community through contract. Hobbes tries to reconcile his political system with materialistic analysis of human behavior. For this reason, in Hobbes thought, to be aware of political organization depends on recognizing human nature and to recognize human passions and moods depends on the recognition of mechanical principles and physical laws. Hobbes’s ethics and politics are compatible with his mechanical materialism as well, and they are occasionally explained on the same ground. Our leading questions in this paper are as follows: 1. what are the characteristics of human nature as one of the main elements of Hobbes psychological system? 2. How has Hobbes compiled his political philosophy on the basis of human nature characteristics? This paper mainly claims that Human nature is based on the principles of motion and mechanical principles in Hobbes view, and as a result, mankind has not been able to establish political community naturally. Mankind is civil not naturally but compulsorily and should be forced to be social, that is to say, the political society order is not natural order but artificial one which is manifested in the content of contract items. Therefore Hobbes mechanical psychology prepare the way for his civil philosophy.

 Keywords: Hobbes, Psychology, Physics, Politics, Mechanical Principles, Human nature, State

.

 

Introduction:

Hobbes argues everything in the world is body; everything that goes on in the human body, including appetite, aversion, etc. must be explicable only in terms of the motions of the smaller bodies that make us up. And consequently, these features of human beings must be explained by physics. In this way, physics must ground the science of man; the De corpore must ground the De homine. And, in turn, the state is itself a complex body, made up out of complex human bodies. As Hobbes writes in a famous line at the beginning of the Leviathan: “For by art is created that great Leviathan called a commonwealth, or state, which is but an artificial man, though of greater stature and strength than the natural….” [Lev. intro.] And thus the De cive must follow the De homine.

Hobbes on human nature

Hobbes’s mechanistic and materialist account of voluntary motion leads to a pessimistic psychology. From the very start of Leviathan, then, the influence of natural philosophy on the political argument is apparent. Methodologically, Hobbes begins with an analysis of the parts of commonwealth, i.e. humans. Following a geometric model, he provides definitions of various mental phenomena and then draws a number of conclusions. In the process, he relies upon the mechanistic and foundational principles, as we shall see, ultimately influence many aspects of Hobbes’s political philosophy.

Hobbes’s psychological observation in the early chapters of Leviathan concern human individuals, not members of a community. As part of the reconstruction of the commonwealth, Hobbes joins individuals together in a state of nature, a state prior to the formation of the commonwealth. The first thing to recognize about the natural condition of mankind is the relative equality of individuals within it. Although some humans are manifestly stronger in body or of quicker mind, Hobbes claims that when all is reckoned together, the difference between man and man is not so considerable that the weakest has strength to kill the strongest (L13.183). Equality, for Hobbes, is based upon the equal ability to kill or conquer others. In addition, Hobbes believes human conceit of one’s own mental abilities reveals the equality of natural wit. Since most people hold their own wisdom to be greater than the wisdom of others, this proves rather that men are in that point equal, than unequal. After establishing the equal ability to kill, Hobbes explains how equality leads to conflict. To acquire desired objects, each person tries to destroy the other. Faced with the threat of an enemy, Hobbes claims, it is reasonable to defend oneself through anticipatory violence. Through preemptory attacks on enemies, people are better equipped to conserve their own lives. The best offence, to use a sports analogy, is the best defense. And finally, Hobbes believes the desire to achieve glory, which is a characteristic of human nature, leads to conflict: for every man lookes that his companion should value him at the same rate he sets upon himself’(L13.185). Thus, in the state of nature, there are three causes of conflict: competition, distrust and the desire for glory.

The natural condition of mankind, then, is a state of war in which life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short (L 13.186). In such a state, Hobbes contends that each individual has a natural right to use his own power, as he will himself, for the preservation of his own life.

Conclusion

For Hobbes' human nature is ultimately grounded in the human body, its make-up, and the deterministic order of /nature that ultimately fixes our behavior. Insofar as society cannot change our bodily make-up, it cannot change the passions and inclinations that it gives rise to, passions and inclinations that ultimately give rise to conflict of all against all when we are in the state of nature. For Hobbes, life in society doesn’t fundamentally alter us. Human nature is a constant, the same inside society and out. Remove the external constraints that the institutions of coercion provide to guarantee that people behave well toward one another, and we are back in a state of war of all against all.

 

References

1. Hobbes, Thomas (1969), The English Works of Thomas Hobbes of Malmesbury, vol 3, Leviathan, collected and edited by William Moleswortth, John Bonhn Henrietta Street, Covent Garden: London.

2. Newey, Glen (2008), Routledge philosophy guidebook to Hobbes and Leviathan, Routledge, London and New York, Routledge.

3. Cees, Leijenhorst(2007) “Hobbes and Aristotelian on sense perception and imagination” on the Combridge companion to Hobbes’s Leviathan edited by Patrica springborg, New York, Combridge university press.

4. Strauss, Leo, 1965. ‘On the Spirit of Hobbes’s Political Philosophy’, in Keith C. Brown (ed.), Hobbes Studies (London: Basic Blackwell).

4. Scroll, T (2005).  “Seventeenth-century materialism: Gassendi and Hobbes” in Parkinson, G. H. R. ), the Renaissance and Seventeenth-century Rationalism, London and New York: Routledge. pp. 219-238

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Hobbes Interpretation of Human Nature and its Effect on the Formation of His Political Philosophy

نویسندگان [English]

  • seyedmostafa shahraeeni 1
  • Yousof Nozohur 2
  • Beyan Karimi 3
1 Associate professor at University of Tabriz
2 Associate Professor, University of Allameh Tabatabie
3 PhD of Philosophy, University of Tabriz
چکیده [English]

Hobbes political thought is based on his twofold analysis of mankind: Human being, on one hand, as a composed material body in the network of mechanical forces follows his desires and passions. He, on the other hand, studies the concepts of right and duty in order to establish community through contract. Hobbes tries to reconcile his political system with materialistic analysis of human behavior. For this reason, in Hobbes thought, to be aware of political organization depends on recognizing human nature and to recognize human passions and moods depends on the recognition of mechanical principles and physical laws. Hobbes’s ethics and politics are compatible with his mechanical materialism as well, and they are occasionally explained on the same ground. Our leading questions in this paper are as follows: 1. what are the characteristics of human nature as one of the main elements of Hobbes psychological system? 2. How has Hobbes compiled his political philosophy on the basis of human nature characteristics? This paper mainly claims that Human nature is based on the principles of motion and mechanical principles in Hobbes view, and as a result, mankind has not been able to establish political community naturally. Mankind is civil not naturally but compulsorily and should be forced to be social, that is to say, the political society order is not natural order but artificial one which is manifested in the content of contract items. Therefore Hobbes mechanical psychology prepare the way for his civil philosophy.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Hobbes
  • psychology
  • physics
  • politics
  • mechanical principles
  • human nature
  • state
-      اشتراوس، لئو، (1377)، حقوق طبیعی و تاریخ، ترجمه باقر پرهام، تهران: نشر آگه.
-      اشترواس، لئو، (1373)، فلسفه سیاسی چیست؟ ترجمة فرهنگ رجایی، تهران: نشر علمی و فرهنگی.
-      اوداینیک، ولادیمیر والتر، (1379)، یونگ و سیاست، ترجمه علیرضا طیب، تهران: نشر نی.
-      بریه، امیل، (1385)، تاریخ فلسفه قرن هفدهم، ترجمه اسماعیل سعادت، تهران: انتشارات هرمس.
-      بشیریه، حسین، «مسائل اساسی در فلسفه سیاسی»، مجلة دانشکده حقوق و علوم سیاسی، حقوقی، شماره 25، دی 1369، از 224-191
-      تاک ، ریچارد، (1376)، هابز ، ترجمه حسین بشیریه، تهران: طرح نو.
-      جونز، و. ت (1362)، خداوندان اندیشه سیاسی، ج2، ترجمه علی رامین ،تهران: امیرکبیر.
-      کاپلستون، فردریک، (1385)، تاریخ فلسفه، ج4، از دکارت تا لایب­نیتس، ترجمة غلامرضا اعوانی، چاپ دوم، تهران: انتشارات علمی و فرهنگی و سروش.
-      کاپلستون، فردریک، (1393)، تاریخ فلسفه، ج5، فیلسوفان انگلیسی از هابز تا هیوم، ترجمة امیرجلال­الدین اعلم، تهران: نشر علمی فرهنگی.
-      ماکیاولی، نیکولو، (1388) شهریار، ترجمه داریوش آشوری، تهران، نشر مرکز.
-      هابز، توماس، (1393)، لویاتان، ترجمة حسین بشیریه، تهران: نشر نی.
-      همپشایر، (1390)، «مقایسه نظریه­های سیاسی هابز و اسپینوزا»، در مجموعه مقالات بزرگداشت دکتر محسن جهانگیری، ترجمه دکتر مصطفی شهرآیینی،  با کوشش احمد مظاهری، تهران: انجمن آثار و مفاخر فرهنگی.
-      Brown, Staurt (2005).  “Renaissance philosophy outside Italy” in Parkinson, G. H. R.), the Renaissance and Seventeenth-century Rationalism, London and New York: Routledge. P. 65-96
-      Geismann, Georg, Spinoza--Beyond Hobbes and Rousseau, Journal of the History of Ideas, Vol. 52, No. 1. (Jan. - Mar., 1991), pp. 35-53.
-      Hobbes, Thomas, (1983), De Cive, the Clarendon edition of the philosophical works of Thomas Hobbes, vol III a critical edition by Howard Warrender, Oxford university press.
-      Hobbes, Thomas, (1999), Leviathan or the matter, form and power of a common-wealth, the University of Oregon.
-      Justin B.Jacobs, (2010) The ancient notion of self-preservation in the theories of Hobbes and Spinoza, King’s College University of Cambridge.
-      Malcolm, Noel (2008), Hobbes and Spinoza, Cambridge Histories Online, Cambridge University Press.
-      Kraye, Jill (2005). “The philosophy of the Italian Renaissance” in Parkinson, G. H. R.), the Renaissance and Seventeenth-century Rationalism, London and New York: Routledge. P. 15-64
-      Cees, Leijenhorst (2007) “Hobbes and Aristotelian on sense perception and imagination” on the Combridge companion to Hobbes’s Leviathan edited by Patrica springborg, New York, Combridge university press.
-      Miller, David, Syidentop, Lary (1983), Nature of political theory, oxford, Claredon press.
-      Newey, Glen (2008), Routledge philosophy guidebook to Hobbes and Leviathan, Routledge, London and New York, Routledge.
-      Navari, C., 1982. ‘Hobbes and the ‘‘Hobbesian Tradition’’ in International Thought’, Millennium: Journal of International Studies, 11(3): 203_/22.
-      Parkinson, G. H. R, (2005), the Renaissance and Seventeenth-century Rationalism, London and New York: Routledge.
-      Rodgers, G.AJ and Alan Rayn (1988), Hobbes and royal society. Oxford: oxford university press.
-      Strauss, Leo, 1965. ‘On the Spirit of Hobbes’s Political Philosophy’, in Keith C. Brown (ed.), Hobbes Studies (London: Basic Blackwell).
-      Scroll, T (2005).  “Seventeenth-century materialism: Gassendi and Hobbes” in Parkinson, G. H. R.), the Renaissance and Seventeenth-century Rationalism, London and New York: Routledge. P. 219-238
-      Field, Sandra (2015), Hobbes and human irrationality in Global discourse, Routledge Taylor and Francis Group. P. 207-219
-      Thomas, Wiliam (1992), great political thinkers, Oxford: Oxford U.P.
-      Yurdusev, Nuri, Australian Journal of International Affairs Vol. 60, No. 2, pp. 305_/321, June 2006/ Routledge.
CAPTCHA Image