h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: Political Philosophy - Hobbes and the Socal Contract - A9630191
Author: lf2871 - come to the darkside, we have cookies - U1781133

Hello again. So this is the third entry i've submited for peer review, and it's on Hobbes and his view of socal contract theroy. I'm kinda new to philosophy so if i get anything wrong please yell! That goes for spelling and grammour mistakes as well, i'm hopeless at that sort of thing! If i haven't explained anything clearly enough, or thourghly enough, again please don't be afraid to ask!

TA!

Haven't had time to read it yet, but you're missing an 'i' in the title Ok, off to read it now - am I right in thinking this will not include Calvin?

I'm just going to smile! I'm newish to philosophy, and i've only really covered Locke, Hobbes and Rouessu. But i'd appereciate any corrections or info you could give me.

Always glad to see guide entries on philosophy

I think this will need quite a bit of work to get into the Edited Guide, and I'll try to post a bit more later on. But I've got a few suggestions for now:

It's worth saying something very brief about Thomas Hobbes and his life and times to put things into context. I think (though others may disagree) that it's hard to understand where Hobbes is coming from unless you know that he's writing just after the English Civil War, in which the lack of an effective Leviathan led to civil war, bloodshed, and chaos.

Any entry on Hobbes should really contain the classic Hobbes quote describing the state of nature: 'No arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.'

It's also worth giving the entry a thorough proof-read - there are a few typos and few sections that read quite awkwardly.

Hey! Nice to meet you. Thanks for takeing the time to read and comment.

I agree, but i'm willing to put in the work.

I'll add the quote, i like it!

But now might be the time to confess i don't really know much about Hobbes as a person! I'll go find out though, so thank you for the sugestion.

As for proof reading..well..i couldn't check gramour to save myself, i'll see if i can get someone to fix it! I am intending on doing a little cleaning up - just wanted to check it was alright before i did a polish.

Hmmm. I haven't the books to hand I'd like to have when commenting, so I shan't say much for now, but I'd like to agree that more historical context is required; to avoid possible anachronism you might mention Rousseau, since it was he who more fully developed the 'social contract' idea, Hobbes's term being 'covenant'.

Hmm..yes i was going to touch on Rousseu and Locke but wondered if they might deserve articles of there own?

Plenty of potential here, but many grammatical things and a few points of argument need tightening up.

being that he is > being

one of the big social contract theorists > a major social contract theorist

"This branch of philosophy is concerned with establishing the 'perfect' society." Rephrase needed; Hobbes may have envisioned a perfect society but social contract theory can do without professing such an aim.

being that it forms > as it is

pre political > pre-political

at No point > at no point

so called > so-called (usually this gets a hyphen)

animalistic > beasts (or some synonym; animalistic is a bit obsolete, and open to misreading)

no society, Nothing > no society, nothing. It is not valid to use capitals for emphasis.

important In considering Hobbes next step. > de-cap 'in'; Hobbes' or (more usually now ) Hobbes's for the possessive.

the single thing to take from Hobbes view of humans in a 'state of nature' is that it is a war; > apostrophe on Hobbes as above, and no semicolon needed.

In a constant struggle > no cap as you are continuing the sentence

the state of nature is best summed up by Hobbes himself, who writes that; > omit 'who writes that;' and use a colon or even a comma but not a semicolon

The social contract founds the basis on which society is built, > The social contract forms the basis (or, better still, is the basis). This is a complete sentence and a fullstop is best here.

. . . many different philosophers have tried to decide on which form of contract, and therefore political society, would be the best. > New sentence, as it is a new thought; but do you want to say it at all, if you aren't going to discuss any other theorists?

This contract is implicit, i.e. it never exists but is understood. > 'exists' is a lazy choice but it is a horribly loaded word. You should find a better way of saying this. Perhaps "it is not generally stated" -- 'generally' may be worth inserting, the famous exception being (admittedly later) the American Constitution and its imitations.

Hobbes view of the social contract runs as follows - > This belongs at the beginning of the following paragraph, and should end with a fullstop (or colon) not a dash.

He argues that it would not be beneficial for Humans to remain in this state of Nature, and in his eyes the only way to do this would be to form a society, But this would be contrary to mans egotistic and war like nature. > humans, nature, but, man's, warlike

The typos are getting thick and fast here so I'll leave you to do your own proofreading. Worse, the phrase 'in his eyes the only way to do this' needs redrafting.

Keep it up lf2871! Don't let me discourage you, this is worth pursuing and polishing a bit more.

Your last sentence "When in fact, there are other, slightly more workable theories" is a prelude to more writing, about other theories. I would simply omit it, unless you want to make this Entry a whole lot longer.

Hey Recumbentman,

Thank you so much for takeing the time and effort to read my article and comment on it. As i have confessed earlier i'm kinda new to philosophy so you must forgive my lack of elequence, i'l get there! Which is the main rason i'm ommiting the other therosts as i wouldn't really feel able to cover them properly. I've acted on your advice, and though don't quite have the time at the momment for a full redraft i will get round too it, honest!

'i was going to touch on Rousseu and Locke but wondered if they might deserve articles of there own?'

Yes, but that doesn't mean Hobbes can necesarily be treated entirely in isolation; the 'social contract' was an idea that Rousseau developed (hence his book of the same title) and in Hobbes the idea of a 'contract' is comparatively nascent. So if you're going to write about 'Hobbes and the Social Contract' I think Rousseau should get a mention; I'm not suggesting that you should devote much space to Hobbes's successors/legacy.

I agree with RFJS that Rousseau should get a mention, it only needs to be a few words. If you do go one to write an entry on Rousseau, you can always get the Eds to link this to it in the future.

There is one point I noticed, that the Leviathan is constrained in some way - this isn't the case, the reason the Leviathan becomes sovereign is because they have the might to beat every other feuding group, which means no-one could threaten the peace once established and no-one can threaten the sovereign.

It's also be nice to see a bit more on the problems of the social contract and the state of nature, you didn't really go into enough detail.

I really like this entry though, I think it'll make a great addition to the Guide and it's getting me all nostalgic for the first year of my degree

Iago

But i thought the leviathen only had power because the people said they did? meybey i got lost somewhere..

I'll brush up on some of the stuff I know about rousseu and add in a little on him.

I'll also think abit more into problems with State Of nature, if there's any obvious ones i've missed it'd be really helpfull if someone can point out what they are, thanks everyone!

ok. I think i might be out of my depth, but i'm brave enough to admit i need help. If any one has the time would they please help me by co-writeing? of course they would get credited.

Am I alone in finding the idea of a 'Socal Contract' intriguing?

Something to do with healthy-looking blondes from Beverley Hills getting together to ensure mutual safety?

I am?

Oh.

Ok.

Not perhaps the way its meant too be seen but whatever keeps you happy!