How is Thomas Hobbes understanding of happiness different from that of Aristotle?
The difference between Aristotle and Hobbes: with regards to happiness and felicity is the argument of what a good life. Aristotle differentiates the argument on our belief about good and bad, while Hobbes argues that good and bad virtue varies from each individual when desiring.
What does Hobbes theory say?
political philosophy In Leviathan (1651), Hobbes argued that the absolute power of the sovereign was ultimately justified by the consent of the governed, who agreed, in a hypothetical social contract, to obey the sovereign in all matters in exchange for a guarantee of peace and security.
What is the highest good according to Hobbes?
Hobbes says there is no greatest good, and here he says he is no hedonist. Pleasure as such is only one of the possible goals in life, nor is a promise of eternal life the ultimate good in “this life.” What we have is a plurality of goods in a seemingly idiosyncratic fashion.
What is Thomas Hobbes known for saying?
“Words are the counters of wise men, and the money of fools. ” “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.” “The first and fundamental law of Nature, which is, to seek peace and follow it.”
Are Hobbes and Aristotle similar?
They both had a notion of the need for civil order for community and government to work. However, Aristotle understood ethics from some point, but Hobbes did not. Hobbes’ view is basically dictatorship or authoritarian in nature, or certainly leaned that way.
What does Hobbes say about human nature?
Hobbes believed that in man’s natural state, moral ideas do not exist. Thus, in speaking of human nature, he defines good simply as that which people desire and evil as that which they avoid, at least in the state of nature.
Did Hobbes like Aristotle?
Nevertheless, Hobbes was dependent on Aristotle and Aristotelianism (at least as a convenient target, but also, for example, in his psychology),6 and, ultimately, he agreed with and even valued Aristotle on certain subjects.
What will result if human nature is left unrestrained?
As human motives were, in their natural state, guided by unenlightened self-interest, these could, if left unchecked, have highly destructive consequences. Left unrestrained, humans, propelled by their internal dynamics, would crash against each other.