Philosophy

Leviathan

Leviathan

  • Downloads：9391
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2021-08-29 05:50:57
  • Update Date：2025-09-06
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Thomas Hobbes
  • ISBN：0141395095
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

Thomas Hobbes had lived through the Thirty Years War and Britain's civil wars and the horror of what he saw provoked him into thinking in a quite new way - in a world with no safety， with no values beyond violence and greed， how could mankind rescue itself？ What form of politics would provide the security which he and his contempories craved？

Vilified and scorned from the moment it was published， Leviathan was publicly burnt for sedition， but ever since it has exercised a unique fascination on its readers - both for its ideas and for its remarkable prose。 Its concepts dragged Europe into a new world - one which we still live in today。

This new Penguin Classics edition has a fully revised text and a major new introduction by Christopher Brooke。

Download

Reviews

Chris Vaz ，

For a book called the Leviathan， there is a depressing lack of actual detail and explanation by what he actually means。 Certainly there are some brilliant and cogent arguments about the significance of the sovereign and their state， and about the nature of the contract between subjects and the sovereign。Separately the arguments for why the sovereign and not the pope is head of the state and has ultimate authority， is some of the most in depth religious and philosophical analysis that exists。Unfo For a book called the Leviathan， there is a depressing lack of actual detail and explanation by what he actually means。 Certainly there are some brilliant and cogent arguments about the significance of the sovereign and their state， and about the nature of the contract between subjects and the sovereign。Separately the arguments for why the sovereign and not the pope is head of the state and has ultimate authority， is some of the most in depth religious and philosophical analysis that exists。Unfortunately， the book is almost 2 completely separate books in one， which I personally struggle to see the end synthesis of。 The ideas of a true aristocracy （closer to a meritocracy） and a democracy （closer to Marxist anarchy） and why one should be chosen over the other do have solid justifications and reasoning， but too much of the book eventually meanders into meaningless paths that never lead to the point。I would still recommend reading， as a foundational text of modern politics， with some very well argued political discourse to think about。 。。。more

Reed Inn ，

I did try very hard not to measure this work through a modern moral lens， since I strongly disagree with many thoughts Hobbes expressed in his book。 It went well up to the point where I read the following passage: "And when all the world is overchargd with Inhabitants， then the last remedy of all is Warre; which provideth for every man， by Victory， or Death。" （Chap。 XXX Of the Office of the Soveraign Representative） - quite a dangerous （and therefore stupid） thought to spread around， even for 16 I did try very hard not to measure this work through a modern moral lens， since I strongly disagree with many thoughts Hobbes expressed in his book。 It went well up to the point where I read the following passage: "And when all the world is overchargd with Inhabitants， then the last remedy of all is Warre; which provideth for every man， by Victory， or Death。" （Chap。 XXX Of the Office of the Soveraign Representative） - quite a dangerous （and therefore stupid） thought to spread around， even for 1651。 。。。more

Urayoán Verges-Rodríguez ，

'The tyrant's guide to totalitarianism。' I know of the horrible reputation this book has， but I wanted to read it for myself and determine if， besides the infamous winded sections of how to kill， torture， and oppress the citizens of a nation， maybe it had some other value。 But the other sections are pointless and really offer nothing of value either。 An absolute waste of time， this book is just the ramblings of a sociopath jumping through ideological hoops and doing all manner of mental gymnasti 'The tyrant's guide to totalitarianism。' I know of the horrible reputation this book has， but I wanted to read it for myself and determine if， besides the infamous winded sections of how to kill， torture， and oppress the citizens of a nation， maybe it had some other value。 But the other sections are pointless and really offer nothing of value either。 An absolute waste of time， this book is just the ramblings of a sociopath jumping through ideological hoops and doing all manner of mental gymnastics in order to justify mass persecution and slaughter by the State。 。。。more

Cláudio Valério ，

He's not a very good writer and I read him so I can oppose his views thoroughly but in the end I give it a positive review， possibly so I can say that this masochist of a reading made some sense « He's not a very good writer and I read him so I can oppose his views thoroughly but in the end I give it a positive review， possibly so I can say that this masochist of a reading made some sense « 。。。more

Angie Ryan ，

This is an amazing book！ It is so hard to believe that Hobbes wrote this in 1651 and that so many of the ideas that he came up with for it were used in the creation of the US Declaration of Independence。 He was a brilliant man and we are so lucky that the founders knew of his work！ This was a suggested reading for a class that I am taking on revolutionary ideas and was well worth the many hours that it took to get through the whole thing， not just the required passages。

MJ Jabarian ，

A Genius

Astir ，

OK， so， you're probably a politics or law wonk who is interested in reading this for a substantial defence of why rule by an absolute soverign is necessary for the peaceful cohesion of society。 While that sure is in there， what you probably haven't been told is that it's in there heavily buried amongst another 90% of the book being wearingly incessant 17th century banging on about God at each and every opportunity - and that you may come out knowing more about angels and demons than you do polit OK， so， you're probably a politics or law wonk who is interested in reading this for a substantial defence of why rule by an absolute soverign is necessary for the peaceful cohesion of society。 While that sure is in there， what you probably haven't been told is that it's in there heavily buried amongst another 90% of the book being wearingly incessant 17th century banging on about God at each and every opportunity - and that you may come out knowing more about angels and demons than you do political science。 。。。more

Ricardo ，

This edition of Leviathan contains only the first two （of four） books which make up Leviathan。 An Editor's choice due to the fact that the last two books were mostly focused on religion and the specific context on Hobbes' contemporary century。 Given that， my opinion is based solely on the first two chapters of Leviathan。In the first chapter Hobbes analyses/evaluates Man in terms of its behavior， ideas， fears， etc and basically summarizes in the following: man， when free of restraints as in the b This edition of Leviathan contains only the first two （of four） books which make up Leviathan。 An Editor's choice due to the fact that the last two books were mostly focused on religion and the specific context on Hobbes' contemporary century。 Given that， my opinion is based solely on the first two chapters of Leviathan。In the first chapter Hobbes analyses/evaluates Man in terms of its behavior， ideas， fears， etc and basically summarizes in the following: man， when free of restraints as in the basic Nature state， is equal and free to do as it suits to ensure its welfare。 Thus， in Nature， Man's normal state is of a constant war to ensure its liberty and safety。Thus， comes the second chapter of the book where Hobbes details the Commonwealth。 Clearly influenced by its time， specifically the civil in war in England。 Hobbes describes the Commonwealth as a social contract between a sovereign （which can be a single individual or an assembly of individuals） selected by its subjects， where all power is placed upon the sovereign to ensure the safety and welfare of the subjects。 Hobbes then goes into detailing how such contract works （what are the responsibilities， powers and limitations of it） for all parties， as well as showing when a sovereign should be removed for "breach of contract"A book to be read having in mind that its conclusions are strongly linked to Hobbes contemporary society。 Transposing it directly to our current days， produces no value。 。。。more

Anastasia Bodrug ，

După jumătate de an， în sfârșit pot spune că am terminat lectura Leviatanului！ URA！O lucrare foarte dificilă și cam plictisitoare pentru mine， sincer să spun。 Nu mii rușine să recunosc că așa carte "intelectuală" nu mi-a plăcut。 Pur și simplu eu cred că nu am încă acele capacități mentale ca să pot primi plăcere din astfel de lectură。Unele dintre capitole mi-au fost interesante， dar majoritatea mi-au fost greu de citit， în special ultima dintre cărțile despre statul creștin （din simplul motiv că După jumătate de an， în sfârșit pot spune că am terminat lectura Leviatanului！ URA！O lucrare foarte dificilă și cam plictisitoare pentru mine， sincer să spun。 Nu mii rușine să recunosc că așa carte "intelectuală" nu mi-a plăcut。 Pur și simplu eu cred că nu am încă acele capacități mentale ca să pot primi plăcere din astfel de lectură。Unele dintre capitole mi-au fost interesante， dar majoritatea mi-au fost greu de citit， în special ultima dintre cărțile despre statul creștin （din simplul motiv că religia absolut defel nu mă interesează）。 Ceea ce vreau să observ este că aceasta este un fel de explicație a lucrurilor evidente， după care începi să înțelegi domeniul juridic un pic altfel。 Ei bine， opinia lui Hobbes în ceea ce privește monarhia și suveranul echitabil este puțin utopică， dar are dreptul la existență。 。。。more

Milkman3367 ，

Historically important but tedious and boring。

Cam Netland ，

As a person who has always struggled with authority， from little league baseball to my job as a teacher， I read this book to develop an internal opposition to challenge the nagging voice that continuously whispers against my superiors。 It worked。 What a horrifying world Nature truly is and how fortunate we are to live in our modern society。 A society that unconsciously values Hobbes’ social contract and consciously rejects his fallacious notions on fundamentals such as free speech or checks and As a person who has always struggled with authority， from little league baseball to my job as a teacher， I read this book to develop an internal opposition to challenge the nagging voice that continuously whispers against my superiors。 It worked。 What a horrifying world Nature truly is and how fortunate we are to live in our modern society。 A society that unconsciously values Hobbes’ social contract and consciously rejects his fallacious notions on fundamentals such as free speech or checks and balances。At the same time， how unfortunate are we who took little heed to Hobbes’ warning about how easily our assemblies are corrupted by the interests of private men and the psychological damages from too much liberty amongst the people。 I am no monarchist， but as an American I have witnessed firsthand the failures of “democracy” in a Commonwealth。However， even our corrupted government is preferred to none at all。 Hobbes’ use of inductive reasoning against what arises from the lack of a sovereign power and the natural condition of man is as frightening as it is convincing。 A missing authority is far more dangerous than the presence of even a despotic one。 Not convinced？ Ask yourself。 Would you trust your own neighbor to help you if there were no laws nor government？ What about the people two streets away？ We are afraid of anarchy and rightly so。 Movies like the Purge， Birdbox， and anything zombie related question and exaggerate how we would respond in Hobbes “nature。” But they are not far off from the truth。 The answer is unspoken amongst friends but known immediately to ourselves。 We don’t do so great by one another when the situation is dire。 And so， as much as we may hate the unjust laws， we would hate the alternative far more。 Violent death and anarchy。I may not like being told what to do but I’ve never idealized anarchy。 Now I’m even further opposed to it。 When no man knows what belongs to another and anarchy rules the land， there is no more right and wrong or good and evil， there is only each man securing his own peace in whatever way he can。 To have such a vapid and naive view of humanity to truly believe we could coexist in such a nature is illusory。 It astounds me that educated people I call friends would label themselves anarchists。 Of course， Hobbes’ solution is no panacea。 Hobbes is truly outdated and limited in his reasoning， but to deny and reject everything from this work would be as foolish as it is contrarian。 What I love and respect most about this work first of all is his definitions。 One can trust a man who crafts original and accurate definitions for the world around them。 But if one trusts completely in Hobbes， then one can hardly trust another man。 And I do not trust completely in Hobbes。 Surely， we aren’t as barbaric and cruel as he claims。 We care for one another and are affected negatively when bad events occur to our loved ones。 We feel love amid our flawed selfish existences。 I believe this， to my core。 That said， Hobbes’ challenging voice returns to my own convictions and asserts we only feel such love and affection for our fellow man because of the status of government in our lives。 And as for his points in Parts I and Parts II are heavily marked up with my various agreements and oppositions to his argument， I find myself agreeing with him far more than I don’t。 I annotated parts I， II， and the conclusion heavily and skimmed parts III and IV as they have more to do with Christian scholarly work and less to do with Hobbes central argument。 So I committed a personal literary sin and didn’t “read” the entire work， but I believe I understand Hobbes and I completed what I believe is the relevant portion of his work to his argument and my own life。 I take a star away from Leviathan because there are outdated claims on checks and balances and free speech。 I also dislike how this book may be used to justify tyranny and Hobbes’ opposition to the removal of an unjust sovereign because， as he says， the private passions of individuals are too great a multiplicity to be able to agree on what constitutes an unjust ruler。 Seriously？ If there is a genocidal leader， be it an assembly or one person， that leader should be removed no matter what party they represent。 Finally， considering that Parts III and IV have little to do with the central argument I found them unnecessary for anyone who isn’t a biblical scholar。 Overall， I loved what I read and this is a book that is ideologically important for anyone interested in government or self governance。 However， beware if you are a gentle reader， for though Leviathan lacks gruesome episodes， it has scared me far more than any horror novel could。 。。。more

Pat Schakelvoort ，

Oxford world classics was very readable for me a non-native English speaker。

Omar Delawar ，

The notions of civil society and the rule of law are relatively new。 In previous eras， farmers armed themselves to protect their lands; robbery seemed a logical solution to the misery of poverty。English philosopher Thomas Hobbes took a hard look at his seventeenth-century world and found to his dismay that suffering was the rule of the day and that something needed to change。To bring order to societal chaos， Hobbes created his “leviathan，” the model for a strong， centralized power （basically a M The notions of civil society and the rule of law are relatively new。 In previous eras， farmers armed themselves to protect their lands; robbery seemed a logical solution to the misery of poverty。English philosopher Thomas Hobbes took a hard look at his seventeenth-century world and found to his dismay that suffering was the rule of the day and that something needed to change。To bring order to societal chaos， Hobbes created his “leviathan，” the model for a strong， centralized power （basically a Monarch） that based on the support of the people， could create a society in which peace could flourish。While reading this， I couldn't shake off the notion that Hobbes was paid by the Monarch to write this。 While his ideas on the "social contract" were sound， the need to put a Monarch at the helm of society and give him/her all the power makes this whole text super suspect。 I would still recommend reading this as a historical record but not as a serious work on political philosophy it is sometimes claimed to be。 It's way too suspect for that。 Readability: Hard -o--- Easy Practicality: Low -o--- High Insights: Few -o--- Many Length: Long --o-- Short Overall: Bad -o--- Amazing 。。。more

Hanno ，

Typesetting of references is broken

Geoffrey Cowling ，

like the big guy， hes down with god

Stephen ，

This is a classic and foundational work of political philosophy， perhaps the first to cogently argue for the concept of a social contract that has become a staple of so much political philosophy ever since。 The basic premise of the work is that people， by nature， find themselves in a state of war with one another unless they create some kind of commonwealth （monarchy or otherwise） which establishes an absolute sovereign。I was aware of that background on reading the work， but I was surprised by i This is a classic and foundational work of political philosophy， perhaps the first to cogently argue for the concept of a social contract that has become a staple of so much political philosophy ever since。 The basic premise of the work is that people， by nature， find themselves in a state of war with one another unless they create some kind of commonwealth （monarchy or otherwise） which establishes an absolute sovereign。I was aware of that background on reading the work， but I was surprised by it nevertheless。 Firstly， for a work written during the English Civil War， this book was actually remarkably easy going。 Yes there is is flowery 17th century expression， and archaic word endings "he forgeteth" and such like。 Yet the author had a gift for expressing ideas in a manner that was not so dense that a modern reader would need help interpreting it。 It was all very clearly argued。I was also surprised by how much Christian theology was discussed and where Hobbes went with this。 For a writer who was villified by other Christians （he was attacked as an "atheist" by Anglicans and French Catholics alike， and Jonathan Edwards， the Massachusetts Puritan spends much time pulling his arguments apart） he is actually able to reason some very interesting arguments from scripture。 On the one hand， whether angels are corporeal beings seems very much a medieval schoolman fascination of little modern relevance， but his views on transubstantiation and his reasoning about it are much more relevant to contemporary debate。 Also his reasoning about authorship of books of the Old Testament would very much show up many engaged in the modern debate。 So lots of fascinating stuff there。Having said all that， I disagree with Hobbes on many things， and I felt that the treatise did very much reflect the context into which it was written， and there were some leaps and jumps of reasoning I would take exception to。 On the very basic question of the social contract: I find that the social contract has a gaping hole in it。 Someone born into a political state cannot really be said to have assented to the social contract that places an absolute sovereign over them， if they cannot practically choose to dissent from it。 Neither do I wholly agree about the state of war that would exist without such a sovereign。 But then， this is a book review and not my own treatise， so I will end by saying that this is a fascinating book by someone who was evidently extremely clever， well read， and with great ability to communicate his ideas。 It deserves its place as a foundational work of philosophy， but the "Ph" word should not put people off from reading it。 I really liked it。 。。。more

Matthew ，

I'd say the first half still has some relevance today， beyond just getting a historical perspective on the thinking of the philosophy of government。 I'd say the first half still has some relevance today， beyond just getting a historical perspective on the thinking of the philosophy of government。 。。。more

Cooper Hunter ，

Had to put the book down and look for a summary， and watched countless breakdowns and even took a course that covered his works。 I find his writing completely inaccessible and annoying to read。 It takes away from the genius of the man because the dude can not write in a way that I can stand。 PLEASE BE ADVISED！！ The thinker and the ideas that he posits are important historically and central to realist theory and philosophy。 I merely had trouble getting through his writing style。 Perhaps a book by Had to put the book down and look for a summary， and watched countless breakdowns and even took a course that covered his works。 I find his writing completely inaccessible and annoying to read。 It takes away from the genius of the man because the dude can not write in a way that I can stand。 PLEASE BE ADVISED！！ The thinker and the ideas that he posits are important historically and central to realist theory and philosophy。 I merely had trouble getting through his writing style。 Perhaps a book by a writer who could adapt it to the modern day would be important for fans of his philosophy。 。。。more

Buffy ，

got my juices flowing。

TransactSpiral ，

The story is hot and well crafted。

Alin Ierima ，

Who else would the terrifying Leviathan be， if not the institution of the state itself？ Why would humans adhere to such a covenant （not a social contract， as other late philosophers such as Rousseau or Locke would say） if the state rules by using fear and a multitude of restrictions to the natural freedom of the people？ As Hobbes would say， it's because the natural state of the humankind is way scarier: the state of anarchy， in which a war of "every man against every man" ensures a painful， brut Who else would the terrifying Leviathan be， if not the institution of the state itself？ Why would humans adhere to such a covenant （not a social contract， as other late philosophers such as Rousseau or Locke would say） if the state rules by using fear and a multitude of restrictions to the natural freedom of the people？ As Hobbes would say， it's because the natural state of the humankind is way scarier: the state of anarchy， in which a war of "every man against every man" ensures a painful， brutish and short life。I recommend to anyone interested in this book to read it with an open mind， and to keep in mind the historical context in which the book was written; a lot of the ideas presented were seen as borderline heretical and revolutionary by the contemporaries。 But， gradually， these theories have influenced the western philosophers and thinkers in such a way， that today a lot of Hobbes' notions became a component part of today's way of seeing the world and politology。 I wouldn't say I totally agree with Hobbes' way of seeing the world。 But that matters little when discussing such an influential book。 It was a hard read due to the old English， but it was an impressive book nevertheless。"A commonwealth is said to be instituted， when a multitude of men do agree and covenant， every one with every one， that to whatsoever man or assembly of men shall be given by the major part， the right to present the person of them all， as well he that voted for it and he that voted against it， shall autorize all the actions and judgements of that man or assembly of men。" 。。。more

Matt ，

To raise from his short， brutish existence man willing give up his freedom and rights to protect himself if others do the same to one strong man who promises to protect them。 Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan revolves around this idea but leading up to it and expounding upon it is a surprising amount of insight of both political and religious thought。Hobbes’ work is divided into four parts with the first， “Of Man”， covering human nature and why men form governments not for the greater good as other postu To raise from his short， brutish existence man willing give up his freedom and rights to protect himself if others do the same to one strong man who promises to protect them。 Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan revolves around this idea but leading up to it and expounding upon it is a surprising amount of insight of both political and religious thought。Hobbes’ work is divided into four parts with the first， “Of Man”， covering human nature and why men form governments not for the greater good as other postulate but to protect themselves and their stuff。 Hobbes essentially says that men give up their freedom to the government to be protected from other men so they can keep their life and possessions that they can add to。 In the second part， “Of Commonwealth”， Hobbes argues that the perfect government is under one absolute sovereign—whether a monarch or legislative body—that will control all aspects of the government with the aim to preserve the persons of the governed by any means necessary and that the govern must obey the sovereign in all aspects of life including in religion and taxation， the later must be used to support those unable to maintain themselves。 In part three， “Of a Christian Commonwealth”， Hobbes discusses how a Christian commonwealth should be governed and essentially says that the civil power is the final arbiter of all spiritual revelation and thus the religious power is subordinate to the sovereign as seen in the Holy Scriptures。 In the final part， “Of the Kingdom of Darkness”， Hobbes turns his focus towards ignorance of the true light of knowledge and its causes which stem from religious deceivers through four things—misinterpretation， demonology and saints， the mixing of religion with erroneous Greek philosophy， and mixing of these false doctrines and traditions with feigned history。 Hobbes blames all the churches and churchmen for these causes as they are the beneficiaries at the expense of the civil power which endangers the commonwealth and the preservation of every man in them。As one of the earliest and most influential works on social contract theory， Hobbes’ political ideas are often cited and quoted。 However， the fact that almost half the work is a religious discourse was a surprise and insightful。 That Hobbes discredited church-led states was gratifying， though he then recommended state control of religion was a disappointment but not surprising given the theme of his work。 Besides his views on the church-state relationship， Hobbes’ work is primary to understanding how the political thought of today began and how his contemporaries and those that followed him reacted to his views。Leviathan is Thomas Hobbes’ magnum opus of political thought and has been influential for centuries， whether one agrees with his conclusions or vehemently disagrees。 。。。more

Tad Carlisle ，

LeviathanGreat read for beginners studying morality， philosophy， political theory。 I especially enjoyed his use of biblical examination of his ideas。

Cihan Deniz ，

Değerli bir kitabın başarılı bir çevirisidir。 Öncelikle Semih Lim'i tebrik ediyorum。 Kişiye birçok açıdan katkı sağlayacak bir metin olması sebebiyle açık fikirlilikle okunmasını tavsiye ederim。 Bu açılardan iki tanesi şöyle ki;Bir argüman nasıl inşa edilir konusunda bir ders kitabı diyebilirim。 Biçim itibariyle etkilenmemek elde değil。Politik kıvraklık nedir ve nasıl kullanılır konusunda yine çok başarılı。 Kralının meşruluğunu sağlarken， Hristiyanlara ve Hristiyanlığa saygısızlık etmeden Papa'y Değerli bir kitabın başarılı bir çevirisidir。 Öncelikle Semih Lim'i tebrik ediyorum。 Kişiye birçok açıdan katkı sağlayacak bir metin olması sebebiyle açık fikirlilikle okunmasını tavsiye ederim。 Bu açılardan iki tanesi şöyle ki;Bir argüman nasıl inşa edilir konusunda bir ders kitabı diyebilirim。 Biçim itibariyle etkilenmemek elde değil。Politik kıvraklık nedir ve nasıl kullanılır konusunda yine çok başarılı。 Kralının meşruluğunu sağlarken， Hristiyanlara ve Hristiyanlığa saygısızlık etmeden Papa'yı ve Kilise'yi harika eleştirmiş， hatta had bildirmeye girişmiş。 Bu girişim hemen sonuç verdi mi tarihsel olarak bilmiyorum ama bugüne baktığımda sonuç verdiğini görüyorum。 Mutlak otoriteyi eleştirmek isteyen varsa buradan pekala ders alabilir。Beğenmediğim bir yanı da şudur; sanki sıfırdan başlayarak inşa ettiği devlet ve hukuk sistemi vardığı bir doğal sonuç değil de， zaten en baştan varmak istediği sonuç。 Yani sıfırdan çıkarım yapıyor ya da bir dünya inşa ediyor gibi görünse de， niyeti zaten doğru olduğunu düşündüğü şeyi savunmak ya da meşrulaştırmak gibi geldi。 Bu bağlamda yazar benim gözümde bir filozof olmaktan çok bir siyasetçi oldu。Sonuç olarak bu kitap， içinde yaşadığımız dönemi anlayabilmek için okunması gereken önemli bir eserdir。 。。。more

Xenja ，

It is not wisdom but Authority that makes a law。"Leviathan" by Thomas Hobbes from 1651 is by far a complex， controversial book that to this day is one of the most important Western philosophies in relation to politics。 I liked the reference to the sea monster from the biblical reference， before whose omnipotence all human resistance fails - a fascinating metaphor for the state and the human being in the state structure。 it makes sense for a philosopher of the 17th century， the son of a count It is not wisdom but Authority that makes a law。"Leviathan" by Thomas Hobbes from 1651 is by far a complex， controversial book that to this day is one of the most important Western philosophies in relation to politics。 I liked the reference to the sea monster from the biblical reference， before whose omnipotence all human resistance fails - a fascinating metaphor for the state and the human being in the state structure。 it makes sense for a philosopher of the 17th century， the son of a country pastor， to work so closely to religion and to combine his understanding of the state structure with it。 the state that Hobbes creates for man， only in the natural state far from law and state， releases the almost anarchist thinking， how man would probably act， where would be good and bad and what would be motives？ Hobbes concludes quite logically that man's instinct for self-preservation is a natural state， so that he is not bad， only interested in survival。 and that can definitely be approved。 many confused readers like to classify it with social darwinist ideologies， but i think that is the inadequate conclusion which people use philosophy or instrumentalize science and use it to establish a kind of social darwinism。 Hobbes introduces us as readers to the radical autonomous ego， which， based on the principle of thinking， is more in line with Marx's philosophy than with community ideology。 Despite everything he is a product of his time， his religion and his belief in knowing， apart from that it is incredibly dry to fight through his words。 。。。more

Anneliese ，

pretty good but format and structure was confusing。

Hamzah ，

Read chapter XIII & XIV

Hugolane ，

I am not sure I can say anything of great originality about this book， but I have now read it。 I was grateful to have the additional materials included here to think more about Hobbes and understand how his contemporaries thought of his argument。 I confess， I am not convinced by Hobbes's argument about the state of war against everyone that he imagines is the original state of man。 As is all too common in that era， it is too bound up in Biblical emphasis of a singular human origin， and the beli I am not sure I can say anything of great originality about this book， but I have now read it。 I was grateful to have the additional materials included here to think more about Hobbes and understand how his contemporaries thought of his argument。 I confess， I am not convinced by Hobbes's argument about the state of war against everyone that he imagines is the original state of man。 As is all too common in that era， it is too bound up in Biblical emphasis of a singular human origin， and the belief that humans did not enter into a pre-existing system。 In fact， I found it ironic that Edward Hyde noted that God would not create such a world for humans in his criticism of Hobbes。 That said， I see now that we can be grateful that Hobbes stumbles on to the idea of the human right to exist in peace， which comes out of that assumption。 Beyond that what surprised me most， from all I had ever heard， to see that Hobbes leaves open the possibility that the sovereign can also be a parliamentary body， perhaps a wise move for a man who decided to return to the Britain under Cromwell， but nonetheless， an important opening that allows us to use Hobbes Leviathan to think about the modern state， where order may not be determined by one arbiter but the state in all its complexity and anonymity helps maintain order and prevent， if not the war of everybody against everyone， then the descent into a political order where one's proximity to power impinges on our right to equality before the law。 。。。more

Solenne ，

Thomas Hobbes was a deranged， brain dead， totally insane man who obviously didn’t have any hobbies。 This book was a pain to read but it’s okay because I treated it like it was satire and had a good laugh！ Thank god for Rousseau amiright🙏

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Leviathan

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Leviathan&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,Leviathan&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0