Social Fragmentation
In here I wanted to share an essay I wrote about Thomas Hobbes and how if he would have lived in a period where England wasn't in a civil war, he would have viewed the same results.
Social
Fragmentation
Many
would state that war reveals just how primitive humanity really is.
When an individual has views different than those of one's own,
conflict often arises. Thomas Hobbes argued that humanity is savage
by nature, thus in the need of governing as the only other
alternative is chaos. Within this governing state it is in the best
interest of all people to follow the rule of the head that controls,
unless it is at the cost of lives. Only then should the people rise
to reestablish order and end tyranny. There is reason to believe that
Thomas Hobbes' views were influenced by the English Civil War and the
rift in religious beliefs. Still, even if Thomas Hobbes had lived in
a time of peace, there is reason to believe that the concept of
Leviathan would have still existed and his views on people would have
been the same.
Hobbes
stated that men constantly compete with one another. “men are
continually in competition for honor and dignity” (1866). Modern
day civilization for the most part is in a state of peace, yet people
find themselves in a constant state of competition. Sport teams are a
representation of a city or even a country underlining that
competition exists and is part of our nature. Conflicts have been
known to erupt when fans of opposing teams meet during a game.
Unfortunately these people are not competing for honor, or dignity,
but for reasons of pride. This is an example of conflict arising when
people are left to their own accord, similar to what Hobbes wrote in
Leviathan. Hobbes goes on to say that, “among men there arises on
that ground envy and hatred and finally war” (1866). Even in a time
of prosperity, envy and hatred flow through the veins of people.
Humanity is believed to be selfish by nature. When an individual
enhances a life experience for another, self gratification courses
for that person, ultimately leaving a selfless act to be a selfish
one. People cannot strife to create a greater good, similar to
animals that work in union, if everything is in their self interest;
and this was something Hobbes understood by baring witness to some of
the darkest actions man could do. By removing war from Hobbes, these
actions would still exist within everyday people.
Hobbes
made a second point in stating that the common good with certain
animals was not a private matter, but one that would benefit the
species as a whole. In today's society, the common good is thrown out
the window for selfish beliefs. A person's religious views dictate
their own views, and in such, attempt to dictate the lives of others.
The concept of assisting the world or our species is voided by such
selfish views. Views that each individual believes is more valid than
others and their beliefs. Hobbes was born into a world that had
already divided a specific religious belief. The division of
Catholicism and Protestantism (and it influencing the throne at the
time) further solidifies that even if Hobbes had lived in a time of
peace, man would find a way to cause quarrel.
Another
point in which Hobbes makes is that people generally assume that they
themselves are better off at governing others, believing themselves
to be wiser than the rest. This is another point that is shown
through all humans, even at a young age. When children gather to play
games with one another, disputes occur when one feels that the odds
are in an unfair balance. This results in a different child creating
a new set of rules, which he or she believes is more just. Obviously
this is not limited to children, as the same occurs in politics. A
war is not needed to exist in order to understand that these actions
are embedded in everyone. The United States is in constant conflict
with political parties; one that favors a social union and one that
favors self interest.
Humans
posses many abilities that other creatures cannot, and with these
abilities comes deeds that could be deemed as benevolent, or
malevolent. The problematic part of this is that much of it could be
considered subjective, as much of it isn't required for survival,
making these traits seem unnatural. The basic needs for any animal is
to feed, rest, and reproduce. People posses the same skill as all
other animals in this, but what truly sets people apart from animals
is that the species desires beyond its fundamental needs. Because of
these wants, our speech ability gives us an opportunity to create
deception and honesty. Neither of these actions help as a need for
survival to the species, so it is peculiar as to why speech even
exists in its evolved state. All animals contain a basic form of
speech to signify a need or desire, and Thomas Hobbes knew this. Had
his life been at a time when war had not erupted between brethren, it
would still be visible that so much selfish gain can come with the
structure of a sentence.
Beyond
the ability to speak is the ability to express oneself. And with the
ability to express comes more self-indulging desires. In most
societies, people tend to express themselves with the clothes they
wear, their speech method, or with whom they congregate with. Today,
for example, are people that own cars not only for transportation,
but as a way receive attention from others. Again, nothing is gained
from a species point of view, but vanity is achieved. During the era
in which Hobbes lived, social status was as prevalent than as it is
now. Members of a higher court would clad themselves in what would
normally be unattainable for those of the lower class. Even before
Hobbes' time, it was visually apparent with the Egyptians, the
Romans, the Greek, and many others.
It seems
strange that in order for man to feel liberated is by the assertion
of domination over another. This was a point brought up by Hobbes,
and seems relevant still. If by chance there was no war, then man
would find a way to dominate another to feel at ease. This is a case
shown with marriage, with a social structure, and with military.
During the 17th century men acquired all assets of women
upon marriage, and leaving women with almost no other alternative but
to marry. Oppression found its way in marriage, leaving that basic
desire to dominate alive and well in man's heart. If not in marriage,
then in social class were people flexing their power against other
people. Education was granted to only those with wealth or in
connection with the church.
Above
all other faults that man has, the biggest has to be belief. Other
animals act in accordance to the law of the land, while people have
an awareness of self, and act according to their beliefs. A belief is
not based on fact, and it may very well not align with the common
good. Hobbes went on to say, “the agreement of these creatures is
natural, that of men is by covenant only, which is artificial, and
therefore it is no wonder if there be somewhat else required besides
covenant to make their agreement constant and lasting, which is a
common power to keep them in awe and to direct their actions to the
common benefit” (1866). With religion being a prime pull towards
the organization of people, it cannot be the true rule, as it was
made up by man. But man is needed to rule over man, for if there was
no rule, anarchy would dominate. In this comes the idea that humanity
should be governed by one head, but with the peoples interest in
mind, a method that to this day exists.
It
appears as there is no true time of peace when humanity is involved.
The events that existed surrounding Thomas Hobbes' life would not
have changed his output on the views of human existence. Within each
human being is the need to survive, but due to being at the highest
point of the food chain, man's only competition is other men (and
women). The need to survive is a basic evolutionary trait. When
survival is no longer in the rules of nature and into the laws of
man, conflict will always exist. A common good cannot exist when
man's only adversary is itself. With this course of power comes
selfish deeds and thoughts, creating members of the same species to
be rivals, or enemies. The reason a common good cannot exist is
because each and every person has a belief of what is best for
people. Factual information is neglected because of these beliefs,
thus creating a never ending war between people. It will take the
threat of extinction to truly modify the mentality into striding for
the common good. Until now, with humanity comfortably at the top of
the food chain, selfish desires will reign upon our existence.
Regardless of what visually is a time of peace or war, the truth is,
humanity is at a constant war with itself.
Hobbes,
Thomas. Leviathan.
The
Norton Anthology of English Literature.
Gen. ed. Stephen Greenblatt. 9th ed. Vol. B. New York: Norton, 2012.
1856-67. Print.
Comments
Post a Comment