Thomas hobbes vs immanuel kant

Thusly, making a covenant out of self-interest can lead to people in society breaking this contract or making empty promises, as a result of later gains they may receive by not abiding.

For this to work properly each person must give up some rights to an authority. If society as a whole acted based on what actions have moral worth, and had no means to an end, society could never prosper.

Its to say if everyone acted out of self-interest, committing murder because of the fear of being toppled from the top would be morally right. We will write a custom essay sample on Thomas Hobbes vs.

Immanuel Kant While Hobbes addresses that acting out of good will leads to a society that cannot prosper, he is wrong because if society as a whole is working together and acting out duties based on good will, there will be no continual struggle for power motivated by self-interest allowing the covenant of man to prosper as a whole.

No one wants to be in conflict with each other and in a constant power struggle, people acting out of duty, even if calls for actions that have no means or gains to oneself is the only maintain contract.

Acting out of self-interest better preserves a covenant because when we do not follow this principle we are no longer socially accountable. So if one person breaks a contract; lets say people agreed not to steal from one nother, the Leviathan has the power to discipline the person by endangering their way of life, or even by death.

He fails to account that our actions posses moral worth solely when they are motivated by the good will. Thus, to remove society from this state of nature people must consent to covenants governed by Leviathan, which facilitates the performance of the contracts. This condition of peaces or liberty from endless turmoil is only met when there is a common power that people agree to follow.

In Hobbs statement he leaves much to be desired in the definition what serves as goodwill. With this in mind no choice for or against our moral self-interest but for the duty of acting on good will. Therefore using anything at your disposal as a means would have no moral worth.

Although Kant agrees with Hobbes that a state of nature does exist without proper authority, he counters, saying it does not exist because everyone is acting out of duty. This sets a maxim for each individual to follow, so a covenant is formed that society will not break because it our duty, and acting out of from this principle conforms to good will.

This leads to his second law that states, a person must defend themselves by any means and by doing so we act out of self-interest. People must act not according inclinations or rules, but it involves performing acts that have no gains for us, and that is the only way to preserve humanity.

As our duty, whether it is morally right or wrong we must do what is necessary. Therefore, through the fear of hurting our fundamental duty to self-preserve by any means possible and reason we consent to maintain our covenant.

Thomas Hobbes vs. Immanuel Kant

Before one can act they must ask the question would they want others to act in that manner? In regards to the idea that all men should act out of goodwill, this leaves only one viable option for a true maxim.

This will result in a person being placed back into a state of nature.Essay Thomas Hobbes vs. Immanuel Kant Thomas Hobbes Vs. Immanuel Kant PART 1: Thomas Hobbes “Everyone is governed by his own reason, and there is nothing he can make use of that may not be a help unto him in preserving his life against his enemies (Hobbes, ).”.

hobbes and kant. theorists that had very strong views on the social contract were Thomas Hobbes and Immanuel Kant. Although both of these theorists believed in a social contract they both had different views on what it exactly meant.

Thomas Hobbes Vs. Immanuel Kant PART 1: Thomas Hobbes “Everyone is governed by his own reason, and there is nothing he can make use of that may not be a help unto him in preserving his life against his enemies (Hobbes, ).”. This will result in a person being placed back into a state of nature.

25 PART 2: Immanuel Kant When Thomas Hobbes states that “our moral duties must provide each of us with excellent reasons to obey them, and that these reasons must ultimately stem from self-interest (Hobbes, ).

Thomas Hobbes Vs. Immanuel Kant PART 1: Thomas Hobbes “Everyone is governed by his own reason, and there is nothing he can make use of that may not be a help unto him in preserving his life against his enemies (Hobbes, ).” Thomas Hobbes, who is a considered a rational egoist, makes this point in his book Leviathan.

Download
Thomas hobbes vs immanuel kant
Rated 3/5 based on 36 review