Reflection 2 - The professor\'s name was Matt Mortellaro. PDF

Preview

Summary

The professor's name was Matt Mortellaro....

Description

Dana Woods Matt Mortellaro Philosophical Perspectives on Society 8 October 2014 Reflection 2 Hobbes’ main argument in Leviathan is for the state, or rather why the the people should regard the actions of the state as different. His main point for his argument is that the “state of nature” (a society without a state) is almost impossible to live in. The citizens, according to Hobbes, would have no cooperation or trust. This is not necessarily the case. Recalling back to the first section, Anarchists would argue that the state is simply just like everyone else, but they just have a “title,” somehow making them more powerful. So already his argument is invalid, since the actions of the state should not be more powerful than the other citizens. But, looking at his main point, the state of nature is not the worst possible state someone could live in. Cooperation could actually increase, since no one has true power over everyone else. As an example, we can look at a group project. If someone is in charge of the project, making all the rules and bossing people around, the other group members are more likely to refuse to follow their orders (what made that one person have more power than everyone else?). Groups in which all the members can bring ideas to the table is run much more smoothly. If the state is present making all the laws (that not everyone mutually agrees with, another one of Hobbes’ arguments), a majority of the people will not like the power the state has over them, and will be more likely to go against the state. The state of nature is the more peaceful state to live in....