THOMAS HOBBES 1588 - 1679

LEVIATHAN: THOMAS HOBBES ON THE ORIGIN OF CIVIL SOCIETY

 from Understanding Thomas Hobbes: The Smart Student's Guide to Leviathan

Whenever you see or hear the word 'origin' you must be careful not to confuse it with the word 'meaning'.  A theory about the origin of civil society is not the same as a theory about the meaning of 'civil society'.  Origin theories are empirical, requiring observation, experience and experiment.  Theories about meaning are analytic, requiring conceptual analysis.  But meaning comes first.  If you have no understanding of the meaning of the concept, then will not know what to observe, experience or experiment. 

What does 'civil society' mean?   What does 'civil' mean?  Is there such a thing as a non-civil society?   Hobbes answers the third question affirmatively when he says that a non-civil society is a group of people who have 'joined together' or are simply 'a multitude of men.'  When the word 'civil' is added to 'society' then the multitude have joined together by forming political authority, the exercise of legitimate influence by one social actor over another.    

The laws of nature are but empty words

“Covenants without the sword are but words and of no strength to secure a man at all.”

Example: Cicero and Julius have entered into a mutual covenant not to kill or steal from one another. This does not guarantee them protection against injury, death or theft if “there is no power erected, or not great enough” for their own security.  Laws of nature (e.g., “Do not do unto others as you would not be done to”) are empty threats because the behavior they prohibit is “contrary to our natural passions that carry us to partiality, pride, revenge and the like.”  Without the “terror of some power” strong enough to prevent Cicero and Julius from killing one another, the admonition of others to obey the Golden Rule will be ignored when their passions (for example, for revenge) are strong. 

Joining with others is not a solution

“Nor is it the joining together [with others] that gives them this security.”

Joining with small or large numbers of others will not guarantee security.  If Cicero and Julius recruit Maximus, Octavia, Philo, Laurentia, Fortunata and Cato for their security team, a small group of eight might be seen by others as “sufficient to carry the victory.” But this will give others a motive to recruit an opposing team large enough to mount an invasion.

Cicero and Julius might respond to this objection by adding hundreds of people to their small group, giving themselves more defense and protection.  But it is foolish to believe that this will deter a common enemy.  Hobbes predicts that arguments will break out within the group about “the best use and application of their strength.”  These quarrels will “reduce their strength” and make them vulnerable to an easy victory by their opponent.  And even if they have no common enemy, members of large groups will inevitably “make war upon each other for their particular interest.”

Hobbes’ most devastating objection to the “great multitude” proposal is that it assumes the possibility of “peace without subjection.” 

For if we could suppose a great multitude of men to consent to the observation of justice and other laws of nature without a common power to keep them all in awe, we might as well suppose all mankind to do the same; and then there neither would be, nor need to be, any civil government or commonwealth at all, because there would be peace without subjection.

This quote satisfies the 'origin' question.  Civil society has its origin in the realization of the multitude that they must "erect such a common power as may be able to defend them from the invasion of foreigners and the injuries of one another."  Once a large percentage of the multitude comes to realize that they must find and 'erect' a common power that can defend them from invasion and injury and they act on this realization, there is the origin of civil society.