How did Thomas Hobbes Understand The Connection Between Religion And Politics?
Introduction
Thomas Hobbes was born in 1588 in England; he was an English Philosopher of the 17th century who was best known for the work done in the fields of political and moral philosophies. He wrote a book named as Leviathan (1651) in which he shared his political views. The early life of Thomes Hobbes was spent free of anxiety as he attained education from the finest institutions where he interacted with the most intellectual people and prominent personalities who were expert in their fields. His work struggled a lot to gain society acceptance. His books are the depiction of materialist philosophy, as well as, oppositional views regarding the established Church. Due to this reason, he faced extreme reaction from the society which resulted in anti-hobbism movement. People started considering him as an atheist although he did not declare himself as the one. This paper discusses Hobbes Thomas understanding regarding politics and religion.
Political Involvement
As discussed earlier, Thomas was known for the work done in the political and moral philosophical fields. However, his work contributions were more recognized in the political and religious areas. After the death of his uncle, who was responsible for supporting his educational expenses, Hobbes started living with the Cavendish family. That was the time when he associated himself more with the members of parliament, activities of King and other landowners. The strong association with the parliamentary people and King helped in observing the power structure and the government. Whatever he observed from the parliamentary members, Kings, and the associated people, he discussed all that in his political philosophy. Thomas Hobbes got the opportunity to gain the insights about the political environment as he present in different parliamentary debates. In the late 1630s, Hobbes witnessed the disputes between the Parliament and King. The disputes were between them on the issue of raising funds for armies.
Hobbes is known as the founding father of modern political philosophy. This political understanding depicts that every human action is being actuated by selfishness. For instance, individuals involve in the charitable acts only because they feel that they might face the same situation in the future. The future fear actuates a person to indulge in the good deeds. The same scenario is being applied when it comes to the situation of soldiers and firefighters. The same views can be considered as extreme when the person fails to understand the difference between selfishness and self-interest. For instance, self-interest is when a person buy food to kill his/her hunger. On the other hand, the act of selfishness is defined as individual lives in the state of nature and indulge in any of the following states: lack of morality and fear. For instance, helping selected group of people just for the personal gain.
As per Hobbes, selfishness is associated with lack of consideration for others, on the other hand, morality is associated with good behavior. For instance, if a person cuts grocery store line then this act is inconsiderate for those who are in line and depicts immoral behavior. As per Hobbes, without government interventions, no human being can avoid civil conflict and maintain peace. In a state, where there is anarchy or absence of government regulations, their people are indulged in the selfish acts. The rules and regulations are the legislations that depict moral values and one should abide irrespective of the fact whether the laws are good or bad.
Hobbes political philosophy depicts that justice means abiding the law, so there are no unjust laws. A person who negates to abide the established government laws may contradict with the decision to abide the sovereign authorities. According to him, a person can avoid the state of nature through reason and problem-solving abilities. The three laws of nature determine the ability of problem-solving skills and providing logical reasoning. These laws include creating peace (1st law of nature), keeping one’s agreements (3rd law of nature) and seeking peace (2nd law of nature). All these laws suggest treating others in a way that we want others to treat ourselves. To attain this, one should submit their powers to the sovereign authorities and should not act against the established laws. When a person submits their power to the sovereign authority, that means they show their obedience in exchange of attaining self-protection.
However, when the government fails to protect their individuals, then the political obligations come to an end. If the laws are absolute, then it is easy for an individual to leave the state of nature. An individual must submit his will according to the sovereign. If the acts of an individual are against the sovereign, then it is considered as immoral. Hobbes was not in favor of civil disobedience because of two reasons; the first one is that if an individual shows resistance, then he/she reverts to the state of nature, the second one is due to the violation of nature law. The act of disobedience violates the first law of nature that suggests creating peace in the society. An individual who is not pursuing peace, then he/she is still in the state of nature. The worst place for a state is that where individuals resist and indulge in the state of nature. Hobbes warned that if a person or society is doing civil disobedience, then it is similar to the state where one is fighting with self. The third law of nature suggests it is not enough to make contracts rather it is essential to keep the contract that one makes. The third law of nature is violated if the society resists against government established laws. Self-preservation is the basic principle on which the political philosophy is based on.
As per Hobbes’s understanding of politics, there is a difference between the law of nature with the right of nature. The law of nature is defined as the rules and regulations which tell us the ways of preserving ourselves. On the other hand, the right of nature is defined as one's freedom to do everything. The definition of the law of nature differs than the traditional ones. Hobbes believes that through self-preservation, one can reduce or avoid drunkenness, seek peace and gluttony, etc. Peace is the only possible way for people to get personal security. Whereas, the concept of self-preservation requires utilizing the natural resources.
He declared that where the resources are scarce, there the conflicts among societies arose because people try to exploit and dominate over others. People usually establish a truce with other people and they also agree to cooperate with each other, however, as per Hobbes they cannot remain faithful until and unless they are bound by some power to enforce the agreement. Conflict is evitable only if each and every individual follows self-preservation. The sovereign has no option to escape away from preservation without using their power to support the sovereign decisions. In the state of nature, no property exists as there is a need to have some coercive power to divide the property among people. Without any sovereign power, it is not possible to enforce the property contracts.
Religious Understanding
Thomas understanding of religion is a disputed yet controversial topic. He had been given title based on his views on religion as an Atheist to Orthodox Christian. His religious views are surrounded between two areas; the first thing is what Hobbes believes about the existence of God and the second thing is there any knowledge pertinent to revelation. There are some areas which are kept untouched to discuss. These include the role of religion in politics and whether there is any fundamental role of God in the ethical system or not. He has been called an atheist till date by some people due to his religious views. Now, an atheist does not have the same meaning as it had 17th century back. Although, people believed and declared him an atheist but still many agreed on the fact that he believed in the existence of God.
People considered him as a dubious Christian. There were some claimers who said that Hobbes denied himself that he believed in God. However, it seems false as he discussed about God and his existence numerous times in his works. The false interpretation by others created a dubious character of Hobbes. Hobbes depicted God existence in his book "The Elements Of Law." In that book, he depicted that human’s religious knowledge is limited because the thoughts pertinent to God are limited in our minds. According to him, we associate different attributes to God, instead of that, one must be describing God. When we call God as infinite, that means we are expressing our inability reverence. Some people call God as spirit, which depicts the significance of reverence.
The fear factor is also the key motivational behavior for the people who are afraid of the death and life-after-death, so they follow religious practices. According to Hobbes, there is no reason to get afraid of the death as it is not the end of the life but it may be the beginning of a better life. Due to such beliefs, Hobbes considers religion as the great source of control. Hobbes views merge the concept of Christian doctrine with the civic philosophy. He discussed the theories of human nature and power and linked them with Christian faith.
He said that it is the human nature that an individual gets easily hopeless if he/she confronts two masters: one is God and the other one is civil sovereign. When men divide his loyalty into two sources of power ‘God' and ‘Sovereign', then he starts believing himself as the Kings of the World. He criticizes this point in his political philosophy itself where he gave different arguments through citation of scripture. He supported his thoughts by providing Jesus quotes and according to them the Kingdom of God is not present until the world end. Hobbes believes in the sovereignty of God. However, he also claims that God's Kingdom does not exist in the world till the end. To lead a peaceful life, one should obey the present civil sovereign. His maneuver adapts his materialistic worldview, as well as, Christianity. His thoughts gave a complete shock to the 17th century Church establishment. The Leviathan is the last book which is not much read today because his books have antichurch rhetoric views.
In his book ‘Leviathan', it is discussed how Christian faiths pertinent to the ideal civil society. As per him, the peace of the society is in danger as the sovereign laws differ from the God's laws. For instance, the peace in the society can be maintained if it follows sovereign laws which are based on reasons, however, the religious laws do not obey by such subject. Hobbes said that the Christian doctrine does not negate his political philosophy, but it supports it. Christian doctrine believes in the divine spirits which are according to Hobbes considered as false beliefs. As per him, the civic authority and religious believe should be united under one source. The sovereign must be the head of the church; then it is possible to create a peaceful society. Hobbes suggested that in Biblical scripture the Kingdom of Darkness can be understood metaphorically. He seriously criticized those Christians who propagate beliefs about spirits. He considered such beliefs as false. He considered God in a materialist way and said God is nothing but a body existed. He negated the concept of spirits and said it is a falsehood that the devils are spirits, or there is anything like possession. However, he did not indulge in the direct denial of divine revelation.
Instead, he said that there is no possibility to convince others of the fact that God has made any revelation. According to him, the Catholic and Protestants have made laws, which are against the government laws, are certainly wrong. He claimed that any act by the clergy against the government matters must be opposed and condemned. He further said if the religious beliefs are not becoming any threat to the state laws only then these must be accepted. There must be a free exchange of ideas until and unless the freedom of expression is not creating a barrier towards state laws. The biblical interpretations of Hobbes include as follows: Christianity belongs to the literal meaning of salvation to the next world; the Christian religion is very simple as its summary is all about Jesus as a Christ; and he does not believe in any concept of hell (By Moses, By Christ, and by the Holy Spirit).
Conclusion
Bibliography
Edwards, Alistair. “Hobbes” in Interpreting Modern Political Philosophy: From Machiavelli to Marx, eds. An Edwards and J Townshend (Palgrave Macmillan,Houndmills). 2002.
Hill, Christopher. The Century of Revolution, 1603-1714, second ed Routledge, London. 1961
Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan, ed Edwin Curley (Hackett, Indianapolis). 1994
Hobbes, Thomas. On the Citizen, ed & trans Richard Tuck and Michael Silverthorne. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1998
Sorrell, Tom, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Hobbes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 1996
Sorrell, Tom. Hobbes. Routledge & Kegan Paul, London. (1986)
