Data Bases • Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism? Links • Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com Free Essays • Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • Free Essays • My Term Papers • Essay World • Planet Papers	Search Lots of Essays Back to Subjects - Government & Politics The Foundations of Political Life Hobbes vs Vico The Foundations of Political Life Hobbes vs Vico To understand the theories of Hobbes, you must first understand his basis for those theories in relation to man in his state of nature. Hobbes argues along the lines of realist thinking, much like Machiavelli, that man in his state of nature will succumb to his natural passions. These passions are those which keep man constantly on the path of survival. Man has a natural right to everything in nature and he will acquire what he needs and desires at whatever cost he deems necessary, especially when dealing with the family and it’s protection and welfare. Much like these realist thoughts are applied in today’s world, Hobbes concludes that man will always strive for more power and authority over others. Hobbes discusses how in nature there are certain living creatures like bees and ants that live sociably among each other and yet have no other direction, than their particular judgments and appetites; nor speech, whereby one of them can signify to another, what he thinks expedient for the common benefit. (Hobbes 137) According to Hobbes, man cannot do the same because he is continually in competition for Honor and dignity, which nature’s simpler creatures are not. Because of this, man will take his fate into his own hands and rely on his own strength in dealing with his fellow man. However, Hobbes is not implying that man cannot control himself, but merely stating that man is aware of his unavoidable passions and instincts. Man does possess a level of rational thought to the extent that he knows he must relinquish control to a sovereign power out of necessity. The sovereign power, whether it is an individual monarch, or a small group of elites, maintains order so that man does not fall prey to those passions again and only hinder himself instead of progressing. Because of this basic theory of man and his rationality brought out by necessity, a commonwealth or form of regime is created. In comparison, Vico states that the first form of commonwealth was brought about in the age of divinity where man, by the natural law of divine, believed themselves and all their institutions to depend on the gods, since they thought everything was a god or was made or done by a god. (Vico 169) In this situation man’s sovereign power was the gods that he himself had created, and the fear of these gods kept man on the respectable path. Differing from Hobbes’s view on man’s state of nature, Vico states that human nature is one of intelligence, and hence modest, benign and reasonable, recognizing for laws conscience, reason, and duty. (Vico 168) Once man progressed from the age of divinity, he moved into the age of heroism where the nobles or elites, believing to be of divine origin, ruled the lesser people spawning from bestial origin. These common people allowed themselves to be ruled, according to Vico, because of their own knowledge that the ruling should be done by those of higher status and intelligence, and those with the experience of leadership. Eventually, Vico states, that a human government will form in which virtue of the equality of the intelligent nature, which is the proper nature of man, all are accounted equal under the laws, this being an early form of democracy. As the governments progress though, Vico states that the men change but they retain for some time the impressions of their previous customs. For example, the first gentile fathers, passing from the bestial life to the human, retained, in religious times in the state of nature under the divine governments, much of the savagery and cruelty of their recent origins. (Vico 177) As well as in the formation of the first aristocratic commonwealths the private sovereign powers remained intact in the hands of the family fathers, just as they had held them in the previous state of nature. (Vico 177) Pertaining to the maintenance of these regimes, Hobbes states that even if a member of the commonwealth has a different belief than that of the sovereign, he must be forced to comply with the sovereign’s rule in order to maintain the integrity of the society. For Hobbes if you don’t join the society and agree to the establishment of a sovereign, then everyone else has the right to either force you to join, or they have the right to do harm to you. The reason being that one individual that still resides in the state of nature will have the right to everything and this in itself threatens everyone else’s safety. The sovereign is above the social contract as well. If the sovereign was part of the contract and there was a dispute, then you would fall back into the state of nature, thus the sovereign is above the rule in order to maintain order. The only way that the sovereign can be challenged is when the people, as a whole, determine that the rule is no longer working for their good or has become corrupt, in which case they may remove that government. Otherwise, the people must comply with the supreme power that they had set in place. Although Vico is along the lines of Hobbes in maintaining the government, he has one specific theory that Hobbes does not. In addition to the defined natural law of man, he states there is a natural law of history, which fundamentally states that man is doomed to repeat his own history in a continuous cycle. When society reaches a certain level, it can only be sustained for so long, in which case man will regress back to his barbaric nature forcing the regime to tumble requiring man to start again. Several causes of this are stated such as the progression of man to the point that he realizes his leaders are no better than himself and he revolts, however this phenomenon can occur for just about any reason, and is ultimately inevitable, according to Vico. Hobbes on the other hand, believes that there is no requirement that the regime will fall, but that the only way chaos will return is when man himself allows it to return, because man is ultimately in charge of his own destiny. Aristotle and Socrates believed that man has the ability to reason and this sets us apart from the beast. While both Hobbes and Vico would agree with this view, and they argue this as well, only Vico would agree with Plato on his ideas of the natural order. Plato’s idea of the philosopher kings would coincide with Vico’s views, as was mentioned earlier how Vico feels that men will let the elite rule them because they are better suited for the position. But Hobbes would definitely disagree on the grounds that man merely needs a sovereign to keep him under control but the sovereign does not necessarily have to be of heroic or noble origin. Hobbes differs in this main respect that he believes man is ultimately responsible for his destiny and that there is no natural order. Taking into consideration that there were no real democracies on a large scale present at the time of Vico and Hobbes, they both argue monarchy is the most logical regime of choice. It would be interesting however, to see their thoughts during our current time and how they would relate it to their beliefs, specifically Vico’s law of History. Bibliography: Word Count: 1231
Copyright © 1998-2008 College Term Papers, INC All Rights Reserved. DMCA Notifications and Requests