Hobbes (1588-1679): The Good and Desire Paul Boaheng Contractarian Ethics: Moral rules and obligations arise out of a (voluntary) contract we human beings make with one another as a means of ensuring our survival. They are necessary means for avoiding undesirable consequences. Hobbes’ Radical Individualism Individual human beings are conceptually prior not only to political society, but also to all social interactions. (Contra Aristotle) • Even our ability to speak a natural language does not make us inherently social • Family bonds are not natural to individual. Hobbes’ Subjectivity Moral Subjectivism (Personal): the criteria of correctness of an evaluation of merit or virtue are a function of the beliefs and preferences of the evaluator. Moral Relativism (Personal): a function of the beliefs and practices of the evaluatee. Hobbes is a subjectivist not a relativist. Materialism: What exists is only concrete stuff going on in space and time. The only existent objects are physical (Contra: The Cartesian Conception of the Self) Radical Nominalism: denies universals and asserts the priority of reality over concepts. Hobbes’ Nominalism: General terms like “dog” stand for concrete things resembling each other in ways we find useful to classify together (Chap IV) • No standard for correct using “dog” or “good” apart from what we have in the mind in applying the term Implications of Hobbes’s Nominalism. (a) Nothing can be explained by appeal to human nature or function distinct from concrete, material activity. (b) Scientific wisdom, not understanding, gives us a special insight into the nature of things. (c) Excellence in deliberation does not require any special insight into a situation and what the good requires. Hobbes: the Good and Desire (a) “Good” is a name we apply to whatever we desire. (b) “Evil” is whatever we wish to avoid (Chap IV) Hobbes defends subjectivity of values (Contra Aristotle’s objectivity of values). Hobbes: No standard of good and evil outside human desires. Good is what we apply for what we want. True object of man’s desire: Not to enjoy once only but to assure forever the way of future desire. (XI) 1 Power: means to acquire future apparent good (X). So, general inclination of mankind to a perpetual and restless desire of power after power. Why the (Aristotelian) Highest Good is an Illusion Life of satisfaction or tranquility is impossible. Our desires are insatiable and thus can’t be at peace with ourselves. Aristotle’ Highest Good Presupposes: (1) Standards of values outside human discourse (2) Objective function/purpose/nature of man not actual desires we have in acting and speaking. (3) Good decision reflects an individual of (2) and insight into what in requires in particular. Hobbes: Excellence in deliberation, not special insight into a situation and what the good requires, but PRUDENCE. What does he mean by prudence? The Hobbesian Prudence Prudence: forming expectations about outcome of actions based on past experience 1. In deliberation, we exercise PRUDENCE, a faculty we share with animals whereby we form expectations, based on past experience, about what the effects of particular events and particular actions are. 2. Prudence is what allows someone to govern himself and others. Differences in prudence between men tend to reflect only differences in experience in the affairs of the world. They don’t depend on one’s nature, whether slave or woman etc. 3. We are not equal in reasoning, but this difference is of no moral significance because reasoning is not required for deliberating well. Objection Ethics is not linguistics. Ethics concerns what we ought to call “good” or “bad” not just what we do call “good” or “bad”. Thus, Hobbes has no philosophical conception of morality. Hobbesian Response: Does Aristotle do better? How does Aristotle’s prudent man understand the highest good? Where does the student of ethics get the notion of good and evil from? 2.