2. Hobbes Writes: Covenants Without the Sword Are but Words . (145) a Covenant Is a Mutual

Phil 112 – Spring 2011 Anderson Due Thursday, April 28

1.Some may argue that Hobbes is too pessimistic about man’s capacity to live a decent life in the state of nature. As evidence they may cite the success of the social insects, wolf packs, extended families of great apes and monkeys, pods of whales and dolphins, etc. If animals of lesser ability than man can cooperate well enough to survive, produce offspring, and live what – for their kind – is a decent life, why couldn’t we? How does Hobbes answer this objection? Is he right?

2. Hobbes writes: “Covenants without the sword are but words”. (145) A covenant is a mutual contractual agreement based on a promise by each side to meet the terms of the contract. Given this fact, assuming it is a fact, it creates a serious problem for Hobbes – as well as for contemporary man in parallel situations. To get out of the state of nature and establish an organized government that will enforce the laws of nature, a covenant is needed of “every man with every man”. (148) Each man must promise to give up his right to use unlimited aggression when needed in self-defense provided every other man agrees likewise. But this contract or promise is both temporarily and logically prior to the establishment of the state and necessary to its legitimacy. So it seems to be a “covenant without the sword” and therefore mere words.

Can Hobbes theory still be defended? Is there a way such a contract could be valid in the state of nature despite what Hobbes said?

3. Hume thinks the reason we approve of virtuous actions is their utility. What does he mean by this? Given his analysis, why does the virtue of justice pose a special problem for Hume?

4. When Hume says “morality is more properly felt than judged of” he is saying, in part, that no body of facts alone (the work of reason) can demonstrate or establish the truth of a moral claim. This will seem to most people as mistaken. Consider the following argument: Boris has frequently assisted his friend Gerald when the latter was in need of help even when it was sometimes quite inconvenient for him to do so. (fact) But Gerald has not done the same for Boris. (fact) Therefore, Gerald lacks the virtue of gratitude. (moral claim) Why does Hume think the conclusion does not follow? Is he right about this?

5. What is Mary Midgley’s argument for her claim that if we could not morally judge the practices of other cultures, we could not judge our own?