Hobbes′s Solution to the Problem of Political Authority and its Major Problem

Author: Christian Ganske

Table of Contents

Introduction

Hobbes′s justification of political authority

The Major Problem with Hobbes′s Alienation Social Contract Theory

2

Introduction

In his major work

Leviathan1

(1651), Thomas Hobbes seeks to provide a justification of

political authority that breaks with the Aristotelian tradition that until then had dominated

occidental philosophy. Aristotle, who lived thirteen centuries earlier, had offered an active

explanation of the state, assuming the existence of an objective moral good and the inequality

of people, who are essentially social beings.

Hobbes, in turn, starts from methodological individualism, conceiving society as a set

of `atomized′ individuals, who are, first of all, pursuing their self-interests. In Hobbes′s view,

what is morally good is not, in contrast to Aristotle, objectively given, but just a matter of

individuals′ desire. Not less radical for his time, Hobbes also assumes people to be relatively

equally endowed with physical and mental capabilities. On these premises, Hobbes develops a

comprehensive narrative with the ambition to justify political authority in an innovative and

unconventional manner, namely by a hypothetical social contract among people who consent

to alienate their rights to a sovereign ruler. Thus, Hobbes can rightly be claimed the founder

of the social contract tradition within modern political philosophy. His philosophy has been

subject to debate until the present. Considered as Absolutist, most of Hobbes′s English

contemporaries regarded his philosophy as abject, while he was recited for the same reasons

in France. His social contract theory has been attacked most vividly from a liberal perspective

(most prominently, Jeremy Bentham and James Mill), pointing to a major inconsistency in

Hobbes′s argument, namely the

alienation

of the individuals′ rights to the sovereign.

As this paper will show, Hobbes′s argument, although it represents an intriguing

attempt to justify political authority, indeed eventually fails, since it does not explain why

people would rationally agree to alienate their right of governing themselves, as it may

threaten their well-being.

1 The full title is

Leviathan or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiastical and Civil.

3