Powered by questions like: Does Hank have the right to drink soda? Is it ever okay to swear? and, Does the number six exist? the Hershovitzes take us on a fun romp through classic and contemporary philosophy. If we join kids on philosophical adventures, Hershovitz argues, we can become sharper thinkers and recapture their wonder at the world. This amazing new book . . . takes us on a journey through classic and contemporary philosophy powered by questions like ‘What do we have the right to do? When is it okay to do this or that?’ They explore punishment and authority and sex and gender and race and the nature of truth and knowledge and the existence of God and the meaning of life and Scott just does an incredible job.”—Ryan Holiday, The Daily Stoic And for the question which may arise sometimes, who it is that the monarch in possession hath designed to the succession and inheritance of his power Reading his impressions reminded me of the first time I stood inside Bosnia while looking over Croatia and realized that despite all the wars which get fought there is no visible line to show you where one side ends and the other begins. We may have maps, Google Earth and GPS systems that insist a line is drawn down the land to ensure ownership but when you’re standing there it doesn’t exist. Hobbes begins his treatise on politics with an account of human nature. He presents an image of man as matter in motion, attempting to show through example how everything about humanity can be explained materialistically, that is, without recourse to an incorporeal, immaterial soul or a faculty for understanding ideas that are external to the human mind.

If you’ve ever heard that phrase, ‘nasty, brutish and short’, you probably know about the rather pessimistic thinker who came up with it, Thomas Hobbes. Thomas Hobbes was born on April 5, 1588 to a clergyman and his wife in Wiltshire, and later went to Oxford for his education. In 1651, he wrote a famous book titled Leviathan, in which he expressed his views about the nature of human beings and the necessity of governments and societies. Many people reacted strongly to the publication of Leviathan, as they disagreed with his ideas about human nature. Nigel Warburton, in A Little History of Philosophy, introduces Hobbes’ main ideas: The difference of Commonwealths consisted in the difference of the sovereign, or the person representative of all and every one of the multitude. And because the sovereignty is either in one man, or in an assembly of more than one; and into that assembly either every man hath right to enter, or not every one, but certain men distinguished from the rest; it is manifest there can be but three kinds of Commonwealth. For the representative must needs be one man, or more; and if more, then it is the assembly of all, or but of a part. When the representative is one man, then is the Commonwealth a monarchy; when an assembly of all that will come together, then it is a democracy, or popular Commonwealth; when an assembly of a part only, then it is called an aristocracy. Hobbes proceeds by defining terms clearly and unsentimentally. Good and evil are nothing more than terms used to denote an individual's appetites and desires, while these appetites and desires are nothing more than the tendency to move toward or away from an object. Hope is nothing more than an appetite for a thing combined with an opinion that it can be had. He suggests that the dominant political theology of the time, Scholasticism, thrives on confused definitions of everyday words, such as incorporeal substance, which for Hobbes is a contradiction in terms. If the authors are serious, this is a silly, distasteful book. If they are not, it’s a brilliant satire.Pakistan scared me. I had this image in my head of the monster under your bed who moved his cousin into your closet so nowhere in your room is safe. I have a lot of respect though for their family oriented culture. In it, a giant crowned figure is seen emerging from the landscape, clutching a sword and a crosier, beneath a quote from the Book of Job—" Non est potestas Super Terram quae Comparetur ei. Iob. 41 . 24" ("There is no power on earth to be compared to him. Job 41 . 24")—further linking the figure to the monster of the book. (Due to disagreements over the precise location of the chapters and verses when they were divided in the Late Middle Ages, the verse Hobbes quotes is usually given as Job 41:33 in modern Christian translations into English, [8] Job 41:25 in the Masoretic text, Septuagint, and the Luther Bible; it is Job 41:24 in the Vulgate.) The torso and arms of the figure are composed of over three hundred persons, in the style of Giuseppe Arcimboldo; all are facing away from the viewer, with just the giant's head having visible facial features. (A manuscript of Leviathan created for Charles II in 1651 has notable differences – a different main head but significantly the body is also composed of many faces, all looking outwards from the body and with a range of expressions.)

In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain, and consequently no culture of the earth, no navigation nor the use of commodities that may be imported by sea, no commodious building, no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force, no knowledge of the face of the earth, no account of time, no arts, no letters, no society, and which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short. Compelling . . . genuinely valuable . . . vibrant, funny and provocative.”— Tom Whyman, The Times Literary SupplementHobbes describes human psychology without any reference to the summum bonum, or greatest good, as previous thought had done. According to Hobbes, not only is the concept of a summum bonum superfluous, but given the variability of human desires, there could be no such thing. Consequently, any political community that sought to provide the greatest good to its members would find itself driven by competing conceptions of that good with no way to decide among them. The result would be civil war. It's in this edition that Hobbes coined the expression auctoritas non veritas facit legem, which means "authority, not truth, makes law": book 2, chapter 26, p. 133. Then, we must ask: What are we actually liberating cows from? Could they exist outside of farms? Nature is cruel. There are few if any bovines as we know them in the wild. And if there were, their lives would be nasty, brutish and short. – New York Daily News Cicero maketh honourable mention of one of the Cassii, a severe judge amongst the Romans, for a custom he had in criminal causes, when the testimony of the witnesses was not sufficient, to ask the accusers, cui bono; that is to say, what profit, honour, or other contentment the accused obtained or expected by the fact. For amongst presumptions, there is none that so evidently declareth the author as doth the benefit of the action. But where testament and express words are wanting, other natural signs of the will are to be followed: whereof the one is custom. And therefore where the custom is that the next of kindred absolutely succeedeth, there also the next of kindred hath right to the succession; for that, if the will of him that was in possession had been otherwise, he might easily have declared the same in his lifetime... Religion [ edit ]

A funny, wise guide to the art of thinking, and why the smallest people have the answers to the biggest questions The sovereign exists because the majority has consented to his rule; the minority have agreed to abide by this arrangement and must then assent to the sovereign's actions. The first is by extinguishing the light of scripture through misinterpretation. Hobbes sees the main abuse as teaching that the kingdom of God can be found in the church, thus undermining the authority of the civil sovereign. Another general abuse of scripture, in his view, is the turning of consecration into conjuration, or silly ritual. When God speaketh to man, it must be either immediately or by mediation of another man, to whom He had formerly spoken by Himself immediately. How God speaketh to a man immediately may be understood by those well enough to whom He hath so spoken; but how the same should be understood by another is hard, if not impossible, to know. For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it.

Johnston, David. The rhetoric of Leviathan – Thomas Hobbes and the politics of cultural transformation, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1986.