Professor Skinner has written a delightful book on Hobbes, entitled Hobbes and Republican Liberty.
Hobbes seems to come in and out of favor. In many ways he is seen as a sycophant to the King in his writings. Skinner uses the comparison of liberty as view in the classic republican sense to that as developed by Hobbes. For Skinner the classic republican liberty is that of the free man, as compared to the slave, one whose actions are limited by a free man. Skinner then takes this concept and draws the line to and through the development of English law.
Skinner develops the liberty theme in Chapter 1 and on pp 34-35 he details some of the strengths and weaknesses of Hobbes and his approach. In reading Skinner one sees more clearly the jumps to faith used by Hobbes, the definitions without any basis in demonstrable fact of evidence that Hobbes uses in his constructions. This is in sharp contrast to Locke who is soon to follow. Specifically on p 35 the discussion of the equality of natural liberty to natural right is worth the reading. Skinner does the concepts justice.
On p 48 Skinner makes some telling comments. For example he states: "Politics, we are being reminded, is pre-eminently the arena in which fortune holds sway" He then continues with the statement: "Hobbes is one of the earliest English philosophers to write in a similar way (as to Aristotle) of "politics" as the art of governing cities."
Chapter 3 details the concept of liberty in the act of living in a real city. On p 79 Skinner states a telling statement: "For Hobbes, accordingly, the puzzle remains; what can it possibly mean when someone claims to be a free man while living under a monarch, in which the fullest rights of sovereignty will inevitably be held by the king himself." This is the quandary of Hobbes. Rather than rejecting the king outright, he struggles to justify liberty on the one hand and the almost divine right of the King. Skinner works elegantly through that tension.
In Chapter 5 Skinner deals with liberty in the context of Hobbes in the Leviathan. On p 127 he details Hobbes as follows defining liberty; "Liberty or freedom, signifieth (properly) the absence of Opposition (by Opposition I mean the Impediments of motion; and may be applied no less in Irrational and Inanimate creatures..."
The last is the culmination of freedom as per Hobbes, the ability of water to flow unstopped down a brook, no more no less. Chapter 6 takes this and carries it through a discussion of liberty and political obligation and finally Chapter 7 moves through the present.
Skinner has done a superb task in detailing Hobbes in an historical context and at the same time detailing the ever present issue of what makes a free man. Hobbes is an apologist for the central authority, in contrast to Locke and the other who follow. The whole basis of our Revolution in the United States was freedom as being free from Government oppression and oversight. Hobbes justifies that alternative view, albeit in a less than convincing manner.
Yet why Hobbes and why today? Liberty and freedom are concepts near and dear to the United States and its founding fathers. They for the most part rejected Hobbes and followed Locke. Freedom is why people came to the United States, why it separated from England and why it has come to where it is today. In many ways we may be losing that view. Yes, Health Care is important, but not to the point at which we lose that freedom. Yes, the economy is important, and again not to the point of losing freedom.
Hobbes seems to come in and out of favor. In many ways he is seen as a sycophant to the King in his writings. Skinner uses the comparison of liberty as view in the classic republican sense to that as developed by Hobbes. For Skinner the classic republican liberty is that of the free man, as compared to the slave, one whose actions are limited by a free man. Skinner then takes this concept and draws the line to and through the development of English law.
Skinner develops the liberty theme in Chapter 1 and on pp 34-35 he details some of the strengths and weaknesses of Hobbes and his approach. In reading Skinner one sees more clearly the jumps to faith used by Hobbes, the definitions without any basis in demonstrable fact of evidence that Hobbes uses in his constructions. This is in sharp contrast to Locke who is soon to follow. Specifically on p 35 the discussion of the equality of natural liberty to natural right is worth the reading. Skinner does the concepts justice.
On p 48 Skinner makes some telling comments. For example he states: "Politics, we are being reminded, is pre-eminently the arena in which fortune holds sway" He then continues with the statement: "Hobbes is one of the earliest English philosophers to write in a similar way (as to Aristotle) of "politics" as the art of governing cities."
Chapter 3 details the concept of liberty in the act of living in a real city. On p 79 Skinner states a telling statement: "For Hobbes, accordingly, the puzzle remains; what can it possibly mean when someone claims to be a free man while living under a monarch, in which the fullest rights of sovereignty will inevitably be held by the king himself." This is the quandary of Hobbes. Rather than rejecting the king outright, he struggles to justify liberty on the one hand and the almost divine right of the King. Skinner works elegantly through that tension.
In Chapter 5 Skinner deals with liberty in the context of Hobbes in the Leviathan. On p 127 he details Hobbes as follows defining liberty; "Liberty or freedom, signifieth (properly) the absence of Opposition (by Opposition I mean the Impediments of motion; and may be applied no less in Irrational and Inanimate creatures..."
The last is the culmination of freedom as per Hobbes, the ability of water to flow unstopped down a brook, no more no less. Chapter 6 takes this and carries it through a discussion of liberty and political obligation and finally Chapter 7 moves through the present.
Skinner has done a superb task in detailing Hobbes in an historical context and at the same time detailing the ever present issue of what makes a free man. Hobbes is an apologist for the central authority, in contrast to Locke and the other who follow. The whole basis of our Revolution in the United States was freedom as being free from Government oppression and oversight. Hobbes justifies that alternative view, albeit in a less than convincing manner.
Yet why Hobbes and why today? Liberty and freedom are concepts near and dear to the United States and its founding fathers. They for the most part rejected Hobbes and followed Locke. Freedom is why people came to the United States, why it separated from England and why it has come to where it is today. In many ways we may be losing that view. Yes, Health Care is important, but not to the point at which we lose that freedom. Yes, the economy is important, and again not to the point of losing freedom.
Posts
