A Critique Of Thomas Hobbes Notion Of Political Obligation
Chapter One
1.1 Introduction
Hobbes is one of the political philosophers who used the theory of social contract to explain society and the basis of a person’s obligation within society. His whole work on political philosophy especially his notion of political obligation is centred on who should govern the society, the responsibilities of the government to the governed and that of the governed to the government. His paramount consideration for order in society emanated largely from two happening in his life resulting in his fear of violent death and the need for all contentment of life, these lead him to argue a case for despotism.
Hobbes in his social contract theory maintains that governments are the creation of people and not the creation of God. However, even though we are the ones who create government, we are never allowed to overthrow them once they are established even though we are not happy with the function they are playing. Hobbes believes that we must give them absolute and irrevocable authority over us.
In this paper, we shall assess his description of political obligation, we shall argue and defend the fact that he was not trying to give an exact historical and anthropological account of the development of the societies but he was trying to give a philosophical justification for a certain type of government which was absolute in nature and subscribing to that worsen the already state of nature.
1.2 Statement of the Problem
The main problem associated with Hobbes social contract which generally brought about his political obligation is his idea of submitting to an absolute sovereign and keeping to the contract made by this sovereign power. Can this law made by a single body be seen as that which truly reflects the interests of all, can the law made under compulsion of force be seen as that which truly settle the problem of the state of nature and still allow for other fundamental goals?
1.3 Aims and Objective
It is generally held that every research work has a problem it seeks to address and a unique message it seek to communicate. The said assertion is true of this work.
The aim of this work is to give a critique of Thomas Hobbes notion of political obligation. It will help to create awareness in the minds of my readers concerning their roles as a subject of a given society and that of rulers to the subjects. To those in the academic generally, the essay has the objective of being a ready partner to them in their research work where such research works will be on political philosophy. On the exercise of powers in a political community, it will serve as a guide with extension to the students of philosophy and political science.
1.4 Significance of Study
This study, I believe will instill some degree of philosophical knowledge in the academic community to know the extent to which a government of a given place should exercise its sovereign power. This study is significant also because it would widen the level of consciousness in the minds of the people, to know their rights as a citizen of a given place. Such an attainment will then help in establishing a mature political culture in our society and the nation at large.
1.5 Methodology
This work is going to be expository, analytical and critical in it nature. This research will be within the ambience of a library. The primary source for this research is ‘Leviathan’ by Hobbes while secondary sources are relevant textbook, periodical, journals encyclopedias and available internet materials.
1.6 Scope of Work
This work shall be structured into four chapters, chapter one will encapsulate clarification and definitions of the major term like political obligation and other terms relevant to this work. Chapter two shall be dedicated to reviewing the philosophical tenets of various philosophers (Literature review), their notion of political obligation. In chapter three, we shall fully look into Hobbes notion of political obligation and critics of the notion. Then finally in the final chapter we shall give a critical evaluation of the work and a conclusion.
1.7 Explication of Terms
Obligation
According to ‘Online English Dictionary’ Obligation is defined as “a social, legal or moral requirement, duty, contract or promise that compels someone to follow or avoid a particular course of action”. In the first chapter of ‘moral principles and political obligations’ Simmons point out his understanding of obligation, when he opines thus “an obligation is a requirement, there are limitation on our freedom, impositions on our will, which must be discharged regardless of our indignations” (7). It therefore follows that obligation is a constraint to our action.
Political Obligation
According to Heywood, ‘Political Obligation’ is “the duty of the citizen to acknowledge the authority of the state and obey its laws” (44). John in “Man and The State’ says something about the concept of political obligation when he aver thus “this concept revolves around the obedience citizens owe the state on one hand, and the duties and responsibilities of the state to its citizens on the other hand” (89). Simmons offers his own conception of political obligation when he avers thus “as a moral requirement to support and comply with the political institution of one’s country of residence” (Simmons 29). From the foregoing we can say that political obligation is a moral duty to obey the laws of the state, it gives the citizen an additional reason for acting accordingly.
1.8 Theories of political Obligation
There are various theories of political obligation as hold by philosophers; we are only going to consider four of this theory.
Consent Theory
The most prominent theory of political obligation has been one grounded in consent and has its roots in the social contract tradition of Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau and Kant. According to this theory, political obligation is understand as that which arising from the consent of the governed, or as Simmons explains, “a consent theory is any theory of political obligation which maintains that the political obligations of citizen are grounded in their personal performance of a voluntary act which is deliberate undertaking of an obligation” (Simmons 57). Locke in his second treatise of Government presents the classic formulation of this theory when he aver thus;
Man being, as has been said by nature are free equal and independent, no one can be put out of the estate, and subjected to the political power of another, without his own consent. The only way whereby anyone divests himself on his natural liberty, and put on the bound of civil society is by agreeing with other men to join and unite into a community. When any number of men have so consented to make on community or government there are thereby presently incorporated, and make one body politic, wherein the majority have a right to act and conclude the rest. And thus everyman by consenting with others to make one body politic under one government, puts himself under an obligation to everyone of that society to submit to the determination of the majority and to be concluded by it (Locke 141-142).
According to this theory, political obligation such as promises relies on basic deliberate actions. Simmons while talking of consent theories specified four central theses that he takes to be characteristically advanced by all forms of the theory. He posit thus;
Man is naturally free
Man gives up his natural freedom (and is bound by obligations) only by voluntarily giving a ‘clear sign’ that he desires to do so.
The method of consent protects the citizen from injury by the state.
The state is an instrument for serving the interest of its citizens (62-68).
Gratitude Theory
The theory of gratitude stem from the common notion that obligations can be generated when one person benefits another. Some common examples are ‘A’ helping B by jumpstarting her car or simply holding the elevator for her the idea is that ‘B’ owes something to ‘A’ even if it is simple a ‘thanks’. The idea with this political obligation is that individuals owe certain things to a government that has benefited them. The idea is traced back to Plato in Crito when Socrates contends that one of the reasons he must not escape from his sentence was his obligation of gratitude to Athens. Walker A. in his work currently gives the basis for the gratitude theory when he avers thus.
The person who benefits from x has an obligation of gratitude not to act contrary to x interests.
Every citizen has received benefits from the state.
Every citizen has an obligation of gratitude not to act in ways that are contrary to the state interests.
Non compliance with the law is contrary to the state’s interests.
Every citizen has an obligation of gratitude to comply with the law (walker 205).
It therefore follows that the primary strength of this theory is that it can easily explain the common intuition that a citizen who is denied all benefits from his or her government has no political obligation to said government.
Theory of Fair Play
The fundamental idea in this theory is that an individual who benefits from others sacrifice in any joint enterprise has a moral obligation to sacrifice the same thing or a comparable sacrifice for comparable benefit, in order to offer the same benefit to the other members. If this sacrifice is not made then the individual is acting wrongly by ‘free riding’ accepting benefits while not doing one’s part in the enterprise to repay for the benefit received. H.L.A. Hart’s put down his classic formulation of this theory, he posits:
When a number of persons conduct any joint enterprise according to rules and thus restrict their liberty those who have submitted to these restriction when required have a right to a similar submission from those who have benefited by their submission (185).
We can simply say that the theory of fair play emphasizes just return.
Associative Theory
According to Simmons, “this theory of political obligation is grounded in membership or association” (42). The basic tenet of an associative theory is that political obligation is generated by being a member of a group; there are certain obligations which are tied simply to membership. This type of obligation does not follow from any voluntary action but it is a type of non-voluntary obligation what one is born with. Ronald Dworkin is one of the first and most well know theorist to endorse this theory, he described these non-voluntary obligation by comparing them to other. Special obligations’ individuals have to intimates political association, like family and friendship and other forms of association more local and intimate is in itself pregnant of obligation.
Leave a Comment