Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
-
- Posts: 137
- Joined: November 18th, 2020, 12:22 am
Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
One of the claims that the book makes, is that Hobbes mistakenly believed that all humans were concerned with are things like power, domination, survival and so on. The author says that Hobbes has left out some critical element to human nature, and believes that while we are often concerned for the time being with our survival and things that will free us from the "brutish" state of nature, we have an additional desire for immortality.
This is a big assumption itself, but one that I think can be justified. Theists who believe in a heaven are concerned with reaching this eternal afterlife, the hoarder of acclaim and glory wants their name to be in the history books, I even the most die hard nihilists would like to have a good impact upon the lives of others that lasts after their death (have any nihilists written wills?). Of course there are those who do truly not care for any sort of life after death, which is viable, but I suspect on the whole, through one of these means I've listed or something else, on the aggregate we desire some degree of immortality, and that conflicts with some of these other needs. For example, one might wish to imitate the selflessness of Mother Theresa, which certainly goes against these Hobbsean ideas, in order to gain favor in heaven or acclaim in future generations.
Back to the point the author was making, he stated that if a society (in example, the rapidly declining birthrates in the Islamic world) is under threat of collapse, people will act "irrationally" if you look at it from a purely Hobbsean perspective, but are acting in an understandable manner as they are under the impression that their nationality, culture, ethnic heritage is threatened. Our nationality and so on is something the author believes carries a large amount of the burden of filling this desire for immortality, and when that is doomed, we are left hopeless and confused. Some respond with decadence, others with violence, and this is not due to a lack of resources, but rather our hope of immortality is wounded possibly beyond repair.
So my questions are
1. Do you agree with the author that Hobbes is mistaken about human desires (on the aggregate, not personally)? If so, what might the genealogy of this desire for immortality look like?
2. Do you feel a desire for immortality personally? What are some ways that I didn't mention that you believe people express this desire?
3. Do you think the author is right in that we consciously or subconsciously tie up a lot of hope for immortality in the success of our culture, nation, heritage? I would think the answer to this might be a challenge to Nietzsche's statement that we have killed God and replaced him with nothing.
As for my thoughts, I agree with the author, and what I'm assuming his later assertion will be that our desire for immortality (broadly defined of course) is more important than these Hobbsean needs. I think there is great evidence that when faced with annihilation of our "future selves" we do act in this apparently irrational manner, and from this I conclude that this points to a unique feature of human psychology, one that I think might be deserving of another post. I'll evaluate my ideas further, and hopefully continue with some conclusions in a new thread.
As always, interested to hear ideas, and I'll try to respond as quickly as my schedule allows.
-
- Posts: 77
- Joined: March 29th, 2020, 1:17 pm
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
I don't think Hobbes wanted to suppress religious impulses but neither did he think the political states should be concerned with the desire for immortality.
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
OBVIOUSLY, while human beings WANT to live, then they ALL are concerned with survival. But NOT ALL surviving human beings are concerned with things like power NOR domination at all.HJCarden wrote: ↑December 10th, 2020, 9:57 pm Reading a book entitled "How Civilizations Die" by David P. Goldman (DISCLAIMER: found this book in a dumpster so uncertain if it's worthwhile, but it's good so far).
One of the claims that the book makes, is that Hobbes mistakenly believed that all humans were concerned with are things like power, domination, survival and so on.
This, 'additional', desire for immortality is BECAUSE thee True Self IS 'immortal', naturally.HJCarden wrote: ↑December 10th, 2020, 9:57 pm The author says that Hobbes has left out some critical element to human nature, and believes that while we are often concerned for the time being with our survival and things that will free us from the "brutish" state of nature, we have an additional desire for immortality.
When one is 'alive', then they have ALREADY reached thee One and ONLY 'eternal Life'. The 'afterlife' is just in relation to a different kind of 'life'. This will become UNDERSTOOD later on.HJCarden wrote: ↑December 10th, 2020, 9:57 pm This is a big assumption itself, but one that I think can be justified. Theists who believe in a heaven are concerned with reaching this eternal afterlife, the hoarder of acclaim and glory wants their name to be in the history books, I even the most die hard nihilists would like to have a good impact upon the lives of others that lasts after their death (have any nihilists written wills?).
But 'who' is the "our"?HJCarden wrote: ↑December 10th, 2020, 9:57 pm Of course there are those who do truly not care for any sort of life after death, which is viable, but I suspect on the whole, through one of these means I've listed or something else, on the aggregate we desire some degree of immortality, and that conflicts with some of these other needs. For example, one might wish to imitate the selflessness of Mother Theresa, which certainly goes against these Hobbsean ideas, in order to gain favor in heaven or acclaim in future generations.
Back to the point the author was making, he stated that if a society (in example, the rapidly declining birthrates in the Islamic world) is under threat of collapse, people will act "irrationally" if you look at it from a purely Hobbsean perspective, but are acting in an understandable manner as they are under the impression that their nationality, culture, ethnic heritage is threatened.
And, what is "your" nationality, culture, ethnic heritage?
These things ARE CHANGING, ALL OF THE TIME.
Until you can EXPLAIN and CLARIFY, FULLY, what "our nationality" is, EXACTLY, then what you are 'trying to' CLAIM here will NOT be FULLY UNDERSTOOD.
Also, and by the way, the reason human beings have a desire for immortality is just related to their desire for 'life' itself, or to their desire to live.
The genealogy of this desire for immortality can be CLEARLY RECOGNIZED and SEEN when one KNOWS who AND what they Truly are.HJCarden wrote: ↑December 10th, 2020, 9:57 pm Some respond with decadence, others with violence, and this is not due to a lack of resources, but rather our hope of immortality is wounded possibly beyond repair.
So my questions are
1. Do you agree with the author that Hobbes is mistaken about human desires (on the aggregate, not personally)? If so, what might the genealogy of this desire for immortality look like?
Thee, eternal, True Self, which ALL human beings are a part of, or are related to, is WHERE thee genealogy of immortality originates from, and WHY the desire for immortality is within ALL human beings, but which is suppressed within those human beings who do not desire to live anymore.
For those who answer, "No", then recall back to when you were younger. And, then think about when you were MUCH younger and how you just lived like you were going to forever, without ANY perception of being mortal. You did not just have a desire to live forever. Living forever, or being immortal, was just a part of Natural Life, or just a natural part of your life.
I do NOT believe any thing.
The, so called, "culture", "nation", and "heritage" of thy True Self and the 'success' of this may be related to the, so called, "hope for immortality" but this is because they are a part of 'our' True Self. But, the culture, nation, and heritage of ANY perceived difference in relation to 'you', human beings, has NOT YET been defined NOR clarified. Until then the "success", or not, of these things could not be ascertained.
Human beings kill off/block out 'God', which is just thee True Self, through their BELIEVING, and through their BELIEVING that they have their own individual culture, nation, and/or heritage.
HJCarden wrote: ↑December 10th, 2020, 9:57 pm As for my thoughts, I agree with the author, and what I'm assuming his later assertion will be that our desire for immortality (broadly defined of course) is more important than these Hobbsean needs. I think there is great evidence that when faced with annihilation of our "future selves" we do act in this apparently irrational manner, and from this I conclude that this points to a unique feature of human psychology, one that I think might be deserving of another post. I'll evaluate my ideas further, and hopefully continue with some conclusions in a new thread.
As always, interested to hear ideas, and I'll try to respond as quickly as my schedule allows.
- Marvin_Edwards
- Posts: 1106
- Joined: April 14th, 2020, 9:34 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: William James
- Contact:
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
How could thee eternal and infinite Universe run out of space and resources?Marvin_Edwards wrote: ↑December 11th, 2020, 8:28 am The problem with immortality is that we eventually run out of space and resources and end up crowded and starving forever. So, each life is both temporary and recyclable.
-
- Posts: 608
- Joined: November 28th, 2020, 6:55 am
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
I think that an awareness of one's procrastination, one's limited energy, limited resources, limited opportunities, limited abilities lead one to crave more time. Ultimately, this can lead to what is, for all practical intents and purposes, a desire for immortality.
Then there's the problem of finding living to be worthwhile: Given that one could die or become maimed (due to disease or injury) at any time, so that one cannot work on one's projects anymore, and this is ultimately beyond one's control, then where does one find the motivation to even get out of bed in the morning? It's too hard to begin when you know it will end.
I don't think people generally want to live forever; I also don't think they fear death. I think they fear living meaningless lives. The inevitability of death sharpens this fear to great proportions.
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 6105
- Joined: September 11th, 2016, 2:11 pm
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
The moment of a man's death is the only time when, theoretically, a man knows the meaning(s) of his life. We make essence such as it will be.
- Terrapin Station
- Posts: 6227
- Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
- Location: NYC Man
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
-
- Posts: 165
- Joined: December 5th, 2020, 11:45 am
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
Seems reasonable to assume that what makes life worth living is the unknown [the unknowable].
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7094
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
You are better off going to the sources; Leviathan and Behemoth. His most quoted phrase is that life for men in a state of nature is nasty brutish and short. But the point about his writing is that men are no longer in a state of nature but have entered into a social contract with a heirachy of leadership, and this imposes a set of reponsibilities upon that leadership. The masses exhange some freedoms for the security of the state.HJCarden wrote: ↑December 10th, 2020, 9:57 pm Reading a book entitled "How Civilizations Die" by David P. Goldman (DISCLAIMER: found this book in a dumpster so uncertain if it's worthwhile, but it's good so far).
One of the claims that the book makes, is that Hobbes mistakenly believed that all humans were concerned with are things like power, domination, survival and so on. The author says that Hobbes has left out some critical element to human nature, and believes that while we are often concerned for the time being with our survival and things that will free us from the "brutish" state of nature, we have an additional desire for immortality.
This is a big assumption itself, but one that I think can be justified. Theists who believe in a heaven are concerned with reaching this eternal afterlife, the hoarder of acclaim and glory wants their name to be in the history books, I even the most die hard nihilists would like to have a good impact upon the lives of others that lasts after their death (have any nihilists written wills?). Of course there are those who do truly not care for any sort of life after death, which is viable, but I suspect on the whole, through one of these means I've listed or something else, on the aggregate we desire some degree of immortality, and that conflicts with some of these other needs. For example, one might wish to imitate the selflessness of Mother Theresa, which certainly goes against these Hobbsean ideas, in order to gain favor in heaven or acclaim in future generations.
Back to the point the author was making, he stated that if a society (in example, the rapidly declining birthrates in the Islamic world) is under threat of collapse, people will act "irrationally" if you look at it from a purely Hobbsean perspective, but are acting in an understandable manner as they are under the impression that their nationality, culture, ethnic heritage is threatened. Our nationality and so on is something the author believes carries a large amount of the burden of filling this desire for immortality, and when that is doomed, we are left hopeless and confused. Some respond with decadence, others with violence, and this is not due to a lack of resources, but rather our hope of immortality is wounded possibly beyond repair.
So my questions are
1. Do you agree with the author that Hobbes is mistaken about human desires (on the aggregate, not personally)? If so, what might the genealogy of this desire for immortality look like?
2. Do you feel a desire for immortality personally? What are some ways that I didn't mention that you believe people express this desire?
3. Do you think the author is right in that we consciously or subconsciously tie up a lot of hope for immortality in the success of our culture, nation, heritage? I would think the answer to this might be a challenge to Nietzsche's statement that we have killed God and replaced him with nothing.
As for my thoughts, I agree with the author, and what I'm assuming his later assertion will be that our desire for immortality (broadly defined of course) is more important than these Hobbsean needs. I think there is great evidence that when faced with annihilation of our "future selves" we do act in this apparently irrational manner, and from this I conclude that this points to a unique feature of human psychology, one that I think might be deserving of another post. I'll evaluate my ideas further, and hopefully continue with some conclusions in a new thread.
As always, interested to hear ideas, and I'll try to respond as quickly as my schedule allows.
Hobbes lived during the Civl War, at a time when that contract had been broken by the King Charles the First. That King lost his head for that very reason, and a war was fought resulting in the Commonwealth of Cromwell.
Your references to "immortality" are irrelevant and ideosyncratic bearing no relationship to anything Hobbes said at any time, as far as I remember.
The only reference to this book I have found is with a right wing publishing house Regenery.
One has to ask what sort of axe a man called "Goldman" has to grind with a book subtitled "Why Islam is Dying Too", in a book whose publishing house has published people like Palin, Gingridge and Pence.
There is probably a very good reason why it was in a dumpster. I suggest you return it there, or burn it.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7094
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
Was Goldman Wrong about Hobbes?
- Robert66
- Posts: 521
- Joined: April 20th, 2014, 5:13 pm
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
My point is that we are unable to judge an individual, let alone calculate 'aggregate' 'human desires'.
- Robert66
- Posts: 521
- Joined: April 20th, 2014, 5:13 pm
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
Cut off their heads,
Burn the books,
Weed out the 'other',
Feed only your chooks.
- Sculptor1
- Posts: 7094
- Joined: May 16th, 2019, 5:35 am
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
Ta very muchRobert66 wrote: ↑December 11th, 2020, 4:47 pm I don't remember what Hobbes said (too long ago), but I agree with Sculptor1 that, based on Hobbes' writings, the 'immortality' discussion is irrelevant, and with Terrapin Station that 'people vary a lot'. And understanding the nature of even one human is difficult. Consider for example the post by Sculptor1 in this thread. Obviously well-read and with a good understanding of the subject, Sculptor1 nevertheless suggests burning the problematic book. And who could determine the desires of Evolution (capitalised for clarity)? I confess that I cannot fully read anything by Evolution, because of the formatting, the ALL-CAPS in your face style, the paradoxical fixation with being UNDERSTOOD, and the repeated misuse of 'thee'.
My point is that we are unable to judge an individual, let alone calculate 'aggregate' 'human desires'.
-
- Posts: 957
- Joined: April 19th, 2020, 6:20 am
Re: Was Hobbes Mistaken about Human Nature?
EVERY one, through CLARITY, which is done through CLARIFICATION, which is achieved by just asking CLARIFYING QUESTIONS.Robert66 wrote: ↑December 11th, 2020, 4:47 pm I don't remember what Hobbes said (too long ago), but I agree with Sculptor1 that, based on Hobbes' writings, the 'immortality' discussion is irrelevant, and with Terrapin Station that 'people vary a lot'. And understanding the nature of even one human is difficult. Consider for example the post by Sculptor1 in this thread. Obviously well-read and with a good understanding of the subject, Sculptor1 nevertheless suggests burning the problematic book. And who could determine the desires of Evolution (capitalised for clarity)?
By the way the True 'desires' of EVERY one are the EXACT SAME, which is found VERY SIMPLY and VERY EASILY just through Honesty and CLARIFICATION.
So, you ALLEGE 'you' can NOT read FULLY ANY 'thing' written down by someone, because of the, so called, "formatting", the ALL-CAPS in the WRONG INTERPRETED "in your face" style, the 'paradoxical' fixation, (without EVERY KNOWING what the word 'paradoxical' ACTUALLY MEANS, from the writer), with being UNDERSTOOD, and the repeated misuse of the word 'thee', correct?
By the way, what is to be only Truly UNDERSTOOD, in what I write, is what I suggest 'you', human beings, do. That is; IF 'you' REALLY do want to UNDERSTAND each "other", thee True Self, and the WHOLE story of 'Life', Itself. See, I do NOT what to be UNDERSTOOD here, in this forum. I use this forum to SHOW future peoples how no matter how many times adult human beings are TOLD what to do and is NECESSARY to gain thee unified knowledge of Everything, they still can NOT see 'it'. As EVIDENCE and PROVEN, once again, in what you have written here.
Also, If I, supposedly, 'misuse' the word 'thee', then what is the CORRECT way to 'use' the word 'thee'?
Is 'judge' the RIGHT WORD here?
You are ABSOLUTELY RIGHT in that you are UNABLE to "judge", or better still KNOW, 'another' individual IF you do NOT ask them CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, and you just 'try to' "judge" them/KNOW them by the words alone, which are being 'interpreted' by and from YOUR perspective ONLY.
KNOWING 'aggregated' 'human desires' is EXTREMELY EASY to, so call, 'calculate' once one has FULLY UNDERSTOOD the self, and thee Self, ALREADY.
Actually 'calculating' is COMPLETELY UNNECESSARY as ALREADY KNOWING ALREADY exists.
By the way, and for your information, the ALL-CAPS is used, by me, to DISTRACT 'you' people, in the days of when this is being written, from thee ACTUAL 'message/s', which are within my writings. I do this so that I have thee ACTUAL EVIDENCE and PROOF, to SHOW and REVEAL to those who are prepared to LOOK and LEARN, that the ACTUAL MESSAGES can be CLEARLY SEEN in these words that I have used. However, because of how the Mind and the brain ACTUALLY WORK, the human beings in the days of when this is being written just can NOT SEE 'them'.
Although the MESSAGES are written VERY CLEARLY the ability for human beings to be able to deceive and fool "themselves" can override human beings from SEEING thee ACTUAL Truth of things even when It is 'staring 'you' in the face'. To SHOW, with PROOF, of just how this DECEPTION actually takes place I used 'you', posters, and "volunteers", in this forum, in the days of when this is being written.
But that is enough about 'me'.
Back to the topic, 'human nature' is ALREADY KNOWN, and this is HOW I will ACHIEVE what 'it' IS, which EVERY human being Truly WANTS and DESIRES.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023