Friday, March 8, 2024

The Philosophy of Freedom and Teaching Children to Live the Freedom within Social Context and Values

                                                       Jeanna Albano

Divine Word College of Laoag

Abstract.

Understanding and applying the concept of freedom is contextual. Living life freely within the social context. Thus, since it is within the social context, freedom is not a license to do whatever you want to do, it is not an absolute. Your freedom ends when you cross the boundaries of the freedom of others and cultural, social and moral values. Western society and Eastern society may understand and apply freedom differently, but not necessarily the same.  The purpose of education is to teach children to live their freedom within the context where they are.       

Key Words:  Freedom, social context, values.

 Introduction

Freedom is one of the most frequently used words in our time and often it is misused. Thus it is necessary to be defined and well understood. A proper understanding of freedom will help us to conduct ourselves properly.

Different societies often time emphasize different meanings of freedom. Western and Eastern societies may emphasize different freedom. One might emphasize outer freedom and the other inner freedom. Outer freedom is freedom of action, political or social freedom. Inner freedom is freedom of the mind, freedom from the bondage of ignorance of human nature and its potentialities. Ignorance breeds fear, suspicion, hatred, and confusion.  

However, to function in society, one must give up his identity, conform to anonymous authorities and adopt successful roles (Monte Mayor, 1999). Thus he escapes from inner freedom. The more he escapes from his inner freedom to act according to his will, the more powerless he feels and the more meaningless his life seems to be. If life loses its meaning because it is not lived, man becomes desperate. The ideas of freedom and democracy deteriorate into nothing but irrational faith once they are not based upon the productive experience of each individual but are presented to him by parties and states which force him to believe in these ideas.

This article would like to discuss further the meaning of freedom and how we are going to live this freedom within context and teach children to live freely within context. In this article, the context that the researcher wants to emphasize is the eastern context.

Freedom Defined.

What is freedom? Freedom is not a license to do whatever we want. The word freedom has many different meanings depending on the context. Each person's construction of meaning for their own life depends on freedom. There are two kinds of freedom: The first is freedom of thought, freedom of mind or freedom of conscience.  This is what we call inner freedom, a function of maturate growth or maturity or self-actualization. The second is freedom of choice or freedom of action. This is called outer freedom. The two are interrelated. True freedom emerges when true inner freedom translates into authentic outer freedom. 

The definition of freedom varies with the cultural context. The principles of freedom and democracy are based on responsible freedom which is freedom of thinking and feeling derived from the activity of the human conscience. Inner freedom is a function of morality; it means the maturation of personality integration of conscience. Conscience is the biological mechanism for the maintenance of integration of the human personality in a complex social environment. The human conscience is a free conscience and the development of the human conscience depends on the fulfillment of human needs for unconditional love, work etc. Morality is a function of moral development. Moral development is a function of the development of the human conscience. The human conscience is the human spirit. It is the guardian of the integration of the human personality. It is the core of human values which have evolved through natural selection as a result of its survival value to the human organism's need to adapt to a complex social environment. It is a biologically based intrinsic valuing system which is developed as a protection for the integrated human organism. It is the result of evolutionary processes. The human organism depends on the conscience and the spirit; it is for the survival of the individual organism and the survival of the species.  The development of the human conscience results in humanistic morality or free morality as opposed to authoritarian morality. Free morality is morality based on inner freedom. The development of free morality is a result of the development of inner freedom. And it is the biological basis of the so-called higher values.

Still in line with the meaning of freedom, according to Mortimer Adler (1963), there are three distinct meanings of freedom: 1) an individual is said to be free when external circumstances permit him/her to act as he wishes for his good; 2) an individual is said to be free when he/she has acquired enough virtue or wisdom to be able willingly to do as he ought, to comply with the moral law, or to live by an ideal befitting human nature. This kind of freedom resides in an individual's state of mind or character, and it is quite independent of all external circumstances; 3) all men are said to be free because they are endowed by nature with the power of free choice, the power to decide for themselves what they shall do or become.

The Western Concept of Freedom

The Western concept of freedom is freedom of choice. In the Western world, freedom is perceived in terms of the ability to satisfy personal desires and impulses for self-expression in the absence of obstructions and restraining influences of authoritarianism.  The emphasis is on external factors of freedom as they relate to the outer aspects of life or politics - freedom of expression, autonomy, self-determination, self-dependence, self-regulation and democracy.

Such a concept of freedom has influenced economic and political concepts. Freedom and capitalism denigrate the value of true freedom in American capitalist society. In American culture, the ideals of political freedom are used by the propaganda machine in the interests of capitalism to divert people's attention to the choice of products which they as consumers can buy. In the consumer society, people are kept ignorant of the real meaning of freedom and conditioned to think that they enjoy the freedom to choose.  Freedom of choice as outer freedom is not the translation of freedom of thought. The inner freedom is to act from conviction and internal harmony according to one's own will or conscience. Freedom of conscience is not encouraged or even allowed. Freedom in capitalist society is the outer freedom which emphasizes the outer aspect of life and is often confused with political and social freedom. As a result of the suppression of inner freedom, the individual does not know what he wants, what he thinks or what he feels. He is not free according to his own will, acting from inner harmony and conviction. To function in society, he must give up his identity, conform to anonymous authorities and adopt successful roles. The more he escapes from his inner freedom to act according to his own will and conscience, the more powerless he feels and the more meaningless his life seems to be. Freedom as inner freedom emphasizes the inner aspect of life and can be likened to the German word for freedom - 'freiheit' in which the root 'heit' refers to the inner condition or state of mind or consciousness state. The closest English equivalent would be 'freedom hood' meaning 'freedom of one's consciousness state, the conscious inner struggle for inner freedom for which all human beings strive for understanding and knowledge of one's connectedness with the world and other beings in the world (Maguigad, 2005)

The Eastern Concept of Freedom

The Eastern concept of freedom is freedom of the mind. In the Eastern world, freedom is perceived in terms of the ability to act according to those convictions which result from internal harmony and freedom of conscience or free will. Emphasis is on internal factors of freedom as they relate to the inner aspects of life or the inner life - freedom from conditioning, freedom from fear, freedom from desire, and freedom from sorrow. Inner freedom is not a question of will but of observation and contemplation. Inner freedom is based on the ability to see reality as it is, with a sense of responsibility or caring i.e. love in the sense of loving-kindness, wisdom of compassion and creative intelligence. Creative intelligence is functional in the normal growth and development of society. Social intelligence is a function of optimal mental health. Social intelligence is also the capability to sense social reality and consider social reality when making decisions or actions.  Education for social intelligence is education for the cultivation of the total human being; an example is holistic education. Holistic education is responsible education which allows for freedom to learn from experience or experiential learning

Teaching the Children to Live Freedom within the Eastern Context and Values

To teach the right meaning and practice of freedom can be done through holistic perception and holistic education.   It should be remembered that freedom is the most important condition necessary to ensure the cultivation of natural development - not freedom as a license but freedom with control and responsibility. Although freedom in the Eastern context is the freedom of the mind, the ability to act according to the conviction that results from internal harmony and freedom of conscience, however, the application of such freedom is not absolute, in the sense that someone cannot just act based on his conviction alone but social realities and moral values are factors to tame freedom. In the Eastern context, freedom is not regarded as a free ticket to do whatever you want to do but as freedom that is placed within the social context.   Such a concept should be inculcated at the beginning of childhood. Since childhood, a child is oriented to what it means to be free within the context.

Learning is a natural function of the brain and the healthy mind. There is no such thing as a neutral educational process. Education functions either as an instrument which is used to facilitate the integration of the younger generation into the logic of the present system and bring about conformity to it or it becomes the practice of freedom, how men and women deal critically and creatively with reality and discover how to participate in the transformation of their world. The development of an educational methodology that facilitates this process will inevitably lead to tension and conflict within our society. But it could also contribute to the formation of a new man and mark the beginning of a new era in Western history.

Real freedom is a consequence of development and education; it is the consequence of latent guides, aided by education. It is the construction of the personality, reached by effort and one's own experiences; it is the long road which every child must take to reach maturity. Development cannot be taught. Freedom does not consist in keeping up an uninterrupted and unimpeded external activity but is something achieved through conquering, by personal reflection, the difficulties that prevent immediate overflow into action and spontaneous success and genuine freedom is intellectual. It rests on the power of thought. To cultivate unhindered, unreflective, external activity is to foster enslavement, for it leaves the person at the mercy of appetite, sense and circumstance (Kesson, 2010).

The result of a good education must be to produce a mature person. A mature person would be a person who knows how to use his freedom in the proper context. Though the concept of freedom is universal the application of such freedom is contextual. Contexts are always different depending on where you are in this world. When you are in Western culture, the application of freedom should be adjusted to the Western context and when you are in the Eastern world, the application of freedom should be adjusted within the Eastern context. Western culture may emphasize individuality and independence, while Eastern culture would emphasize social harmony and interdependence. As a consequence, the application of freedom for the East would be limited by the concept of harmony. Your freedom ends when you destroy harmony and social relationships. It is not like 'mind your own business' and don't mind my business as in the Western culture. Thus children must know where they are and learn how to exercise freedom within the context where they are. It is like a Filipino behaves like an American and an American behaves like a Filipino. It is what is happening. Besides, there can be no freedom independent of social, moral and cultural context. For the human individual in a cultural context, the nature of reality is determined by the nature of the cultural environment. The nature of the cultural environment is determined by the cultural values, moral values and belief systems.

            Teaching Methodology

Teaching children about such freedom is not an easy job; given the fact the world has no boundaries because of technology. The Internet has communicated directly to children or students what is happening around the globe. However, such a situation is not an excuse for educators to teach children about the meaning of freedom within their cultural values and social values. Humans are the product of their environment.   

In line with that idea, educators must analyze the cultural context in which they are doing their work of educating. There can be no educational policy or practice independent of a social and cultural context and therefore there is no such theory as objective educational theory. For the human individual in a cultural context, the nature of reality is determined by the nature of the cultural environment. The nature of the cultural environment is determined by the cultural values and belief systems. Stimuli from the cultural environment are directly related to the basic assumptions underlying the values of the culture. They are peripheral to the stimuli in the field of focused attention. As peripheral stimuli, they are processed by the brain at the subconscious level. The cultural values are a product of the cultural belief systems which make up the cultural consciousness. The cultural belief systems are a product of the history of the culture. Cultural history forms the basis of cultural consciousness, the source of the peripheral stimuli processed subconsciously by the individual in a cultural context. The individual's thought and behaviour patterns are influenced by the subconsciously processed peripheral stimuli from the cultural environment. Unconsciously perceived and processed by the brain, peripheral stimuli from the cultural environment are inherent in the so-called cultural consciousness. The educational process for the individual within a cultural context involves conscious thought patterns in the framework of unconsciously processed environmental stimuli of the cultural consciousness. The learning process combines the processing of environmental peripheral stimuli with conscious thought processes involved in cognition. Educational policies are formulated in the context of a prevailing cultural worldview which is inherent in the prevailing cultural belief systems and values. Cultural belief systems are created in the framework of the basic assumptions underlying the cultural view of the world - the reality which is perceived from the point of view of the people living in their own time. The individuals within a given culture perceive their world from their point of view, with the technology, the resources and the education accessible to them. They identify with the belief systems of their culture and perceive the world from the point of view of the cultural belief systems. An individual educated within the context of given cultural belief systems internalizes the cultural values. The cultural values are derived from the cultural beliefs (Miller, 2005)

Conclusion

From the concept of freedom alone shows a difference between the West and the East. Thus human conduct must be different too. Humans are the product of their environment or society. The eastern world emphasizes social relationships and harmony while western culture emphasizes individuality. Such concepts naturally influence how humans from two different contexts live life differently. Thus, the application of the concept of freedom is then contextual. For the Western, freedom is absolute but for the Eastern, freedom is not absolute. In that case, social context, values, and cultures define the boundary of freedom.   

 

References

Maguigad, R. B..2005. Philosophy of Man. Libro Filipino 90-D N. Ramirez Street, Galas, Quezon City

Montemayor, Felix M. 1999. Introduction to Philosophy Through the Philosophy of Man Revised Edition. Navotas Press, Navotas, Metro Manila

Kesson, Kathleen. 2010. Critical Theory and Holistic Education: Carrying on the Conversation. http://wwwholisticeducation.com

Schaull, Richard. 2008. Introduction of Pedagogy of the Oppressed. http://www.paulofreire.com.

Miller, John. 2005. Holistic Education in a Prophetic Voice in Worldviews, Educational Orientations and Holistic Education. http://www.holisticeduactor.com

http://www.holisticeducator.com/freedom.htm

http://www.holisticeducator.com/culturalcontext.htm

 

 

 

"zone name","placement name","placement id","code (direct link)" dameanusabun.blogspot.com,SocialBar_1,24187568," src='//pl24288067.cpmrevenuegate.com/18/2e/0d/182e0dbed8a3f72c57f9272d88ccc8a5.js'>" https://lipsgig.com/q9h97sj5?key=23b279e99ed6a529a30f577cdce2aeb9

Thursday, February 29, 2024

TRAVERSING EXISTENTIAL LANDSCAPES: PROACTIVE LEADERSHIP IN HEIDEGGERIAN PERSPECTIVE

 Mark Bryan M. Aguinaldo

Divine Word College of Laoag

Abstract:

          The paper digs into proactive leadership in organizations by utilizing Martin Heidegger's philosophical framework. Heidegger's philosophy offers valuable insights into the temporality of being in the world, authenticity, and human existence. These insights are highly relevant to modern leaders who face challenges in unpredictable and dynamic contexts. The paper examines how proactive leaders can gain a deeper insight into themselves and their organizations by adopting Heideggerian notions. This will help them anticipate obstacles and respond to them with honesty, foresight, and ethical awareness.

Keyword: Heidegger, Existence, Dasein

Introduction:

          Leadership in modern organizational situations often involves navigating complicated problems and uncertainties. It is a multifaceted phenomenon that shapes organizations, societies, and individuals. Proactive leadership, characterized by anticipation, adaptability, and forward-thinking, has become increasingly important when dealing with dynamic settings. However, exploring the essence of human life and decision-making through philosophical understanding can benefit the idea of proactive leadership. The existentialist philosophy of Martin Heidegger offers a wealth of ideas that can shed light on the fundamentals of proactive leadership. More so, his exploration of being and existence provides a unique lens for understanding leadership beyond conventional paradigms. This journal aims to clarify how leaders can nurture authenticity, temporal awareness, and ethical engagement in their undertakings by examining the intersections between proactive leadership and Heideggerian philosophy.

Martin Heidegger: A Brief Overview

          Martin Heidegger (1889-1976) emerged as a prominent figure in existentialism, phenomenology, and hermeneutics. His intellectual; journey began in humble circumstances, growing up as the son of a sexton in Messkirch, Germany. Heidegger’s intellectual gifts led him to pursue higher education, where he studied under influential philosophers such as Heinrich Rickert and Edmund Husserl. His doctoral dissertation explored psychologism, while his habilitation thesis focused on the Scholastic theologian John Duns Scotus. Heidegger’s spiritual crisis and subsequent rejection of Roman Catholicism marked a pivotal moment in his life, culminating in his marriage to a Lutheran woman, Elfride Petri. His philosophical legacy extends far beyond existentialism, influencing fields like literary criticism, psychology, and theology (Arendt, 2013).

Heidegger’s Theory of Dasein

          The fundamental principle of Heidegger's theory of Dasein, or "being-there," is the understanding of human existence and agency. Heidegger defined Dasein as having three characteristics: temporality, situatedness in the world, and potentiality for being. Proactive leadership requires a deep understanding of both one's existence and the opportunities present in the corporate setting, according to Dasein.

In addition, Heidegger emphasizes the importance of true self-awareness and being open to one's potential in his concept of authenticity. Heidegger defined authentic leaders as individuals who, instead of bowing to instrumental reason or societal standards, face the existential reality of their circumstances with courage and resolve.

Another essential component of Heidegger's philosophy is temporal awareness, which emphasizes the understanding of the past, present, and future as interwoven aspects of human experience. Proactive executives who are aware of their organization's time horizon may spot new trends, seize opportunities, and successfully manage risks.

Proactive Leadership

          Leaders who employ a proactive approach to leadership are known for their foresight, initiative, and forward-thinking. Proactive leaders do not only react to events as they occur, but they also actively seek opportunities, anticipate potential problems, and take steps to prevent them, shaping the future direction of their organizations. To promote organizational performance and adaptability in changing circumstances, this leadership strategy combines strategic foresight, innovation, and risk management.

Multiple studies have demonstrated the value of proactive leadership in various organizational settings. Proactive leaders encourage a creative and innovative culture among their teams (Parker et al., 2006). They create an environment where employees feel encouraged to take measured risks and pursue new ideas by promoting experimentation and learning from mistakes. Proactive leadership is also linked to organizational agility and flexibility. Proactive executives are skilled in scanning the external environment for new trends and disruptions to enable their companies to react quickly to shifting market conditions and competitive challenges (Yukl, 2012).

Moreover, proactive leadership has been associated with increased employee satisfaction and engagement levels. Employees tend to be more motivated and inspired to achieve company goals when they perceive their leaders as proactive and forward-thinking (Parker et al., 2010). Proactive leaders show a genuine interest in the growth and well-being of their team members, which helps build loyalty and trust throughout the company.

In conclusion, proactive leadership is essential for enhancing employee engagement, promoting innovation, and advancing organizational success. Through proactive leadership, leaders can successfully navigate complex and uncertain circumstances and steer their organizations toward long-term growth and success.

Leadership and Dasein

Leadership can be viewed through the prism of Heidegger's idea of Dasein, which refers to the particular way of being that is human. This way of being is marked by temporality, situatedness, and existential openness to possibilities. In simple terms, leadership is a way of being with others in which leaders and followers live together in a meaningful world. This emphasizes the relational dynamics of leadership, highlighting how people are related to and dependent upon one another in social circumstances.

Moreover, Heidegger offers insights into the relational dynamics of leadership through his concept of care (Sorge). Care is defined as awareness of one's surroundings and concern for others, and is crucial for building meaningful relationships and promoting collective flourishing inside organizations.

Examining leadership from the perspective of Heidegger's Dasein highlights the existential, ethical, and relational aspects of both leading and being led. Leaders can foster cultures that promote growth, innovation, and well-being within their enterprises by accepting the existential realities of human life and interacting truthfully with others.

Effective leaders are people who genuinely interact with both their own and other people's lives, creating a feeling of community and purpose inside the workplace. Authentic leaders are those who face the existential reality of their circumstances head-on with courage and integrity, eschewing the urge to follow social standards or instrumental logic. Genuine leadership entails a dedication to moral behavior and conscientious decision-making, which is based on an understanding of one's capabilities and constraints.

Conclusion:

          In summary, the paper sheds light on the significance of being a proactive leader by utilizing Martin Heidegger's philosophy as a framework. With the integration of Heideggerian concepts such as Dasein, authenticity, and temporal awareness, leaders can attain a profound understanding of their own identities and that of their organizations. This existential standpoint assists leaders in navigating the complexities of today's educational landscape while acting ethically, anticipating the future, and staying true to their values. By adopting this approach, institutions can become more innovative, flexible, and resilient, as it encourages a forward-thinking mindset that allows for ethical decision-making and future-proof strategies.

In conclusion, the adoption of Heideggerian philosophy in leadership provides leaders with the tools they need to build a sustainable and prosperous future for their organizations. As Maxwell aptly puts it, “Leadership is not about position; it’s about action.” Proactive leaders take action, shape outcomes, and inspire others to do the same.

References:

Arendt, H. (2013). The human condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Heidegger, M. (1927). Being and Time. Harper & Row.

Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time (J. Macquarrie & E. Robinson, Trans.). Harper & Row.

Maxwell, J. C. (2007). The 21 Irrefutable Laws of Leadership. Thomas Nelson.

Parker, S. K., Williams, H. M., & Turner, N. (2006). Modeling the antecedents of proactive behavior at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(3), 636–652.

Parker, S. K., Bindl, U. K., & Strauss, K. (2010). Making things happen: A model of proactive motivation. Journal of Management, 36(4), 827–856.

Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 179-201.

Yukl, G. (2012). Leadership in Organizations (8th ed.). Pearson.

 

anakbeong.blogspot.com,SocialBar_1,24187607,"" https://lipsgig.com/q9h97sj5?key=23b279e99ed6a529a30f577cdce2aeb9

Wednesday, February 28, 2024

THE NATURE OF MAN/WOMAN ACCORDING TO THOMAS HOBBES

 ALELI AGUSTIN PAGTAMA

Divine Word College of Laoag

Abstract

One of the essential issues confronting political organizations, and educational and professional strata is the issue of human nature.  One of the said issues is the ideology of Thomas Hobbes on human nature and his attempts to identify the conditions for social order.

Deploying a critical analysis method, the paper identifies the strengths and flaws of his ideologies. Some of his ideas are believable; yet, I decided not to agree with his proposition of the existence of the Monarchy system of government. The paper further provides arguments contrary to Hobbes’ pessimism by explaining John Locke’s optimism towards human nature.  Consequently, the paper highlights the imperatives of social order in a manner that accommodates the complexity of human nature.

Key Words: Human Nature, Monarchy, Ideology

Introduction

Some issues confront educators and other professionals teaching various disciplines on human nature particularly those teaching political, social and behavioral sciences. As LeBuffe (2002) explains, the philosophy of human nature requires to be understood in terms of laws, and that human action is comprehended in terms of universal determinism. The principles of human nature proposed by Hobbes is presented in his book entitled “The Leviathan”.  His views on human nature and how the state can control humans are presented.  The ideas of Hobbes clearly provide a picture of humans as rational machines governed by passions combined with reason. Through reasoning, humans search for happiness, power, status and recognition. The state of nature in Hobbes's views shows that when beings compete of the same objects they become enemies and try to kill each other; hence, he believes that the political institutions of the state should take the form of an absolute sovereign.

Educators believed that the field of evidence is no other than the field of knowledge.  This only means that there is a necessity for philosophical analysis of the doctrines of various philosophers.  Since philosophy is the science of wisdom, it provides either factual or conceptual knowledge.  The ideologies/philosophies of Thomas Hobbes then need a critical analysis to provide in-depth explanations of whether to accept or refute his doctrines.

Ideally, our conception of what constitutes human nature and by extension the human person’s place and role in society has serious implications for social order. Thus in the political realm, we have the anarchists, who see man as a rational being whose nature is incompatible with the oppression that society has imposed on it under the guise of government, Oyeken (2010). The human person is a free being capable of living peaceably with fellow human beings of equal natural disposition, wants and drives, Adams (1993) as cited by Oyeken (2010).

On the other hand, Karl Marx (1990) as cited by Oyeken (2010) has an economic view of human nature. For him, capitalism is the cause of all human woe; deriving legitimacy from the present organization of society in such a way that the economic elite’s control of power and resources ensures it has its way. He envisages an uprising of the masses whose revolt will put economic and political control into the hands of the masses in preparation for a transition to a stateless society.

This paper examines the positions of Thomas Hobbes on human nature and their implications for social order. This investigation aims to bring to the fore the gaps between Hobbes’ assumptions and the reality of human nature nowadays.  It also aims to synthesise by proving or refuting Hobbes’ description of human nature and further analyzes its implications for a well-ordered society. At the latter part of the analysis, it presents my arguments based on the present state of nature of man and on the leading ideas of various political exponents. 

The Life of Thomas Hobbes

Thomas Hobbes (1588 – 1679) is an English political philosopher.  He is widely held as the “father of political science.” According to the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Thomas Hobbes was born on the 5th day of April 1588. His home town was Malmesbury, in Wiltshire, England.  His mother is very little known while his father is a disreputable local clergyman. Hobbes left Malmesbury to study at Magdalen Hall, Oxford. His study there was supported by his uncle, Francis Hobbes, who was a Glover.

Hobbes left Oxford in 1608 and became the private tutor for the eldest son of Lord Cavendish of Hardwick (later known as the Earl of Devonshire). He travelled with his pupil in 1610 to France, Italy, and Germany. He then went to London to continue his studies, where he met other leading scholars like Francis Bacon, Herbert of Cherbury, and Ben Johnson.

The death of Cavendish's son led Hobbes to find another pupil. In 1629, he left for the continent again for a two-year journey with his new student. When he returned in 1631 he began to tutor the younger Cavendish son.

From 1634 to 1637, Hobbes returned to the continent with the young Earl of Devonshire. In Paris, he spent time with Mersenne and the scientific community that including Descartes and Gassendi. In Florence, he conversed with Galileo. When he returned to England he wrote Elements of Law Natural and Politic, which outlined his new theory. The first thirteen chapters of this work were published in 1650 under the title Human Nature, and the rest of the work as a separate volume entitled De Corpore Politico. In 1640, he went to France to escape the civil war brewing in England. He would stay in France for the next eleven years, taking an appointment to teach mathematics to Charles, Prince of Wales, who came to Paris in 1646.

Hobbes died on 4 December 1679 at Hardwick Hall, one of the homes of the Cavendish family, with whom he was still associated after seventy years.

Hobbes’s view of human nature

First and foremost Hobbes believes that human nature is a “general inclination of all mankind, a perpetual and restless desire of power after power, that ceaseth only in death”.  According to Hobbes as cited by Meyer (2011) human beings are programmed, mechanical objects to pursue self-interested ends, without regard for anything other than the avoidance of pain and the incentive of pleasure. What motivates human beings, thinks Hobbes, is self-interest. Human judgment is distorted by self-interest and can be easily swayed by rhetoric that is often neither directed toward the public good nor the individual's good.

The above-stated belief simply means human nature is an inherent desire for greater powers.  The desire is to dominate and to conquer, control and subject others under his wings. Such desires are not limited to power, and position but also to own or control resources This supports the belief that humans have boundless and aggressive attempts for the acquisition of abundant resources.  Hobbes argues that the unending yearning for resources and power is not basically rooted in the expectation for more concentrated joys and more prosperity than one has already achieved, but that “one cannot guarantee the power and means to live well, which he has at present, without the acquisition of more” Kope (2009). 

Secondly, Hobbes describes humans in the state of nature as being in “a condition of war of every man against every man”. Hobbes explains that “the continuous pursuit for power and resources is not a manifestation of innate greed, there are some that taking desire in envisioning their own power in the acts of conquest, which they chase afar than their security requires; if others, that otherwise would be glad to be at ease within modest bounds, should not by invasion increase their power, they would not be able, long time, by standing only on their defence, to survive” .  In this view, Hobbes suggests that even if one were to be content with his/her wealth and power; surely there would be another who would not be content with his/her own. That, one must constantly remain on the offensive to ensure that one will not be overrun by the attacks of others, who for the same reason also cannot sit happily idle. Consequently, acting for his/her own preservation, everyone in the state of nature attacks one another, and thereby produces the “condition of war of every man against every man”.

On this doctrine of Hobbes, the state of nature is viewed as constant war and continual fear, in which life is “solitary, poor, nasty, cruel, and short” due to the war of all against all, as caused by the constant struggle for resources.

The state of nature derived from Hobbes’ view of human nature proves the condition of war of every man against every man.  He assumes that without strength, and centralized authority, human beings will perpetually be at war with each other where “every man is enemy to every man.” In this premise, there is what he calls natural laws. The first of these laws is the first law of nature “by which a man is forbidden to do that, which is harsh of his life, or taketh away the means of preserving the same”. This law, which states that a person will use any means in his/her power to preserve his/her life, is derived from the right of nature, which allows one “to use his own power, preserve himself, preserve his own nature, and his own life”. From this first law of nature, and given that each person is in a condition of war of everyone against everyone, Hobbes suggests that “every man, ought to endeavour peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it”.

This suggestion gives the second law of nature, “that a man be willing when others are so too, as far-forth, as for peace, and defence of himself he shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and be contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himself”. This law of nature allows for the possibility of a peaceful status, where people in exchange give up their never-ending search for “power after power”. Because this peaceful status is contrary to human nature, Hobbes’ civil society consists of the introduction of an artificial force, or sovereign, to ensure compliance to this status, and thereby provide “a more contented life”.

Anent to this, Hobbes believes an outside force is necessary to bring men out of the state of nature and into civil society because the laws of nature (justice, modesty, and mercy) of themselves, without the terror of some power, to cause them to be observed, are contrary to our natural passions, that carry us to partiality, pride, revenge, and the like.

Significantly, Hobbes believes that people are driven by irresistible passions; however, the war of all against all results in undesirable and unpleasant situations. People realize and wish to escape from the unwanted state of nature; however, the relentless attention and violence are required to preserve one’s life in the presence of unjust others.

Therefore, Hobbes suggests that the only way to be free from the continual state of war is to create a civil society through a sovereign power that can terrorize everyone into complying with what is actually a beneficial arrangement. Civil society can be founded on a collected power, or sovereign, which ensures a peaceful status by its ability to punish those who would disturb the peace. As Hobbes states, everyone “shall authorize all the actions and judgments, of that man, or assembly of men, (the sovereign) in the same manner, as if they were his own, to the end, to live peaceably amongst themselves, and be protected against other men”.

To ensure peace, the mechanism by the sovereign can be the addition of disincentives (except killing/wounding/maiming) to control the appeal of seeking more property or harming others. This power of the sovereign to disincentivize war, in Hobbes’ view, can include punishments for crimes. In its truest essence, Hobbes’ sovereignty is limited in its power to punish misbehaviours and ensure peace only by its obligation not to harm its citizens. 

     The Relevance of Hobbes's Theory of Human Nature.

The question here is about the relevancy of this theory to the present human nature.

What is the relevance of the philosophy of Hobbes at the present human nature?  Is there any difference between what Hobbes describes as human nature and the reality that we see in the life of man nowadays? Do you have any argument to contradict Hobbes's view?  If you have, then present it, but support it with the opinion of a certain authority or author.

I believe that the ideologies of Hobbes have relevance nowadays and it has no difference with the reality that we can see in the life of man, especially in the Philippines.  The different social issues confronting the society require each and everyone to revisit the doctrines and philosophies of Hobbes which can be of great help to educators like us to rekindle the moral values of our future leaders and students. In return, the moral values imbibed in future generations can help us shape a better society.    

From the point of view of Hobbes, it is worth mentioning his philosophies on human nature as presented in this paper are exactly proven and I agree with them.  To support this position, it requires analysis to explain the criteria by which I will judge the credibility of his views. To believe something credible is founded on valid reasons; a proper sign of whether something is reasonable, therefore, it is obviously revealed in reality. To argue my position that the proposed views of Hobbes of human nature is believable, I will present an analysis of his views relating to moral standard, necessity to civil society, and political paradigm and these views manifested in the present days.

Similarly, I also presented in this paper some argumentative views evident to the exposition of reliable philosophers and a presentation of evaluation of the arguments.

Based on views of human nature proposed by Hobbes and their implications for people in the state of nature and in a civil society, I believe that his views offer a more reasonable account of human nature. His views have implications for the inherent moral standard for human life. The Hobbesian ideology of human nature proposes that human behaviour is driven by “a perpetual and restless desire of power after power”. According to him, humans are motivated to perform in life through an intrinsic desire for more power, abundant resources, and status.  In the pursuit of this aim, there are no corresponding checks and balances on moral obligation. This pessimistic view of Hobbes is manifested in the present time of the Philippines. Many Filipinos like politicians, showbiz personalities and other elitists aim high and work harder to obtain more wealth by all means (whether in a legal or illegal act) to sustain their survival,  influence and power.  The position is not for service but merely for personal gain which is power. For instance, some Filipino showbiz personalities run for public office to gain power and the Philippine government is ruled through a political dynasty.  This proves alone the view of Hobbes on human nature.  These officials are driven by themselves to acquire more wealth, power and status.   While there are some of them whose survival is already guaranteed, yet will exploit others for the sake of living better.

Similarly, Mansour (2006) agreed on the belief of Hobbes that the “state of nature people is free, rational, and knowledgeable.” He cited human acts including acts of will. Acts of will are deliberative acts, which aim at maximizing our personal gain, therefore people in the state of nature are self-interested. Because we all are self-interested in our personal gains, and because we all desire and aspire to similar things that are limited in society, the state of nature will be very competitive. Because of the competition, each person poses a threat to the other. That is, one’s security is someone else’s elimination. That is why the state of nature is a “state of war of all against all”.

On the other hand, the views of Hobbes on human nature have specific implications for the necessity of corresponding civil society. The state of nature proposed by Hobbes is a “state of war where life is short and brutal”.  His belief implies that the existence of a civil society is very important. The sovereign is required to use whatever measures necessary except harming its members so that it can prevent the state of nature.  The need for the influence of civil society can be seen in the cases of riots/lawlessness/revolution that follow natural disasters when existing law-enforcement agencies are incapacitated.

According to Mansour (2006), Hobbes's ideology implies the need for an absolute rule like the rules of Monarchy and Dictatorship to ensure the safety of the system. He believes in the necessity of absolute rule because of the natural human hunger for power which threatens the safety of the contract.  Hobbes concludes that there must be some common power to force people to uphold the contract. This sovereign would be established by the people as part of the contract, endowed with the individual powers and wills of all, and authorized to punish anyone who breaks the covenant. The sovereign operates through fear; the threat of punishment reinforces the mandates of the laws of nature, thus ensuring the continued operation of the social contract signed between the people.

We can infer that this belief of Hobbes suggests a prisoner dilemma.  In my point of view, this suggestion of Hobbes is significant in today’s Philippine situation.  The multifarious issues in the Philippine Bureaucratic System prove that humans are rationally self-interested. The value of self-interest leads to irrational unwanted outcomes. Therefore the necessity for punishment of the offenders of social orders is highly suggested. 

The political atmosphere of the civil society proposed by Hobbes is that the sovereign has an unlimited power to control the lives of its citizens (provided it does them no harm) to maintain peace and avoid re-entering the war of all against all as in the state of nature. I believe in what Meyer (2011) has cited “society is impossible without the coercive power of a state”. This proves alone that the sovereign cannot negate itself to harm its members. Hence, the organized society will be ruled by continuous fear. 

This view was exemplified before during the dictatorial government under the Marcos Administration that had very close control over the lives of the Filipinos through Martial Law. 

A Critical Look at Hobbes’ Views

I found a wonderful contrast to George Orwell’s philosophy as cited by Storgaard (2013) which I also agree with, where he proposes the opposite that humans will perpetually be at war because of strong centralized authorities. He added that revolution is an answer to sovereign tyranny. It is highly emphasized according to him that anarchists is not against organization; however, they are against organizations based on authority like the Sovereign State. Contrary to Hobbes, John Locke as cited by Mansour (2006) also justifies revolution against the government, only if it fails to preserve the liberties of its citizens. 

Tracing back the history of the Philippines, when President Marcos declared martial law (the rule of dictatorship as aimed by Hobbes provided that no harm shall be made) generally the People Power Revolution succeeded.  It resulted in the abuse of authority by the sovereign people and ended in disorder. Truly, there is a necessity for a sovereign to control the humans and people in the state of nature who may not be rational; nevertheless, the resilient centralized authorities can cause upheavals.  

In this point, the necessity for a sovereign in my point of view is adjudged provided that the sovereign State shall respect the rights of the citizens who in no case shall violate the human rights.   

Conclusion

Following an exposition of the logical extensions of views of human nature, I have argued that the views of Hobbes is reasonable, based on the physical manifestation of several implications. His views have implications thereof, have all been shown to be manifested in reality and therefore are (based on arguments above) equally believable.

Truly, I would say that Hobbes gives the best account of the state of nature when he describes a scenario of how the State of Nature would be like, a state of war of all against all. Yes, we can be moral; however, we still disobey someone else’s rights in an intentional way or not. There are instances that what we believe is good can harm another being.

As a citizen of a democratic country, I do not agree with Hobbes's state- the Monarchy despite his good arguments. He only looks for a government that will preserve and uphold the contract and that is Monarchy. The absolute monarchy as described by Wikipedia Organization (2013) is known to be a government of the monarch being the source of power in the state.  The monarch is not legally bound by any constitution and has the power to regulate his or her respective government.  In this tendency, the sovereign can lead to abuse its power.

 References:

Kope, Andrew.  2009.  Human Nature: Hobbes and Locke.  Accessed on November 11, 2013.  Available at http://publish.uwo.ca/~akope2/papers/philosophy/AKope_Hobbesand

Locke.pdf

LeBuffe, Michael. 2002. “Paul-Henri (Baron) d'Holbach”.Accessed on November 14, 2013.  Available at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/holbach

 

Mansour, Hossam. 2006.  Locke’s And Hobbes’ States of Nature.  Accessed on November 13, 2013.  Available at http://www.ahl-alquran.com/English/show_article.php?main_id=118

 

Meyer, Brock.  2011.  Concepts of Human Nature at the Heart of Political Philosophy.Accessed on November 13, 2013.  Available at http://voices.yahoo.com/human-nature-john-locke-thomas-hobbes-8084874.html

 

Oyekan, Adeolu Oluwaseyi.  (2010). Human Nature and Social Order: A Comparative Critique ofHobbes and Locke.  Thought and Practice: A Journal of the Philosophical Association of Kenya (PAK)New Series, Vol.2 No.1.  Accessed on November 13, 2013.  Available at https://www.google.com.ph/search?/complete/search?client=serp&hl=fil&gs_rn=31&gs_ri=serp&pq=Human%20Nature%20and%20Social%20Order%3A%20A%20Comparative%20Critique%20of%20Hobbes%20and%20Locke&cp=180&gs_id=8&xhr=t&q=Human%20Nature%20and%20Social%20Order%3A%20A%20Comparative%20Critique%20of%20Hobbes%20and%20Locke.%20%20Thought%20and%20Practice%3A%20A%20Journal%20of%20the%20Philosophical%20Association%20of%20Kenya%20(PAK)%20New%20Series%2C%20Vol.2%20No.1.%20&ech=2&psi=fqeEUovWD8bpiAfX6oDABg.1384426376217.3&emsg=NCSR&noj=1&ei=kKuEUovQI8LZigfFx4DwBA

 

Storgaard, Claus B. 2013.  Essays: George Orwell, Socialist, Anarchist or what...?Accessed on November 13, 2013.  Available at http://www.k-1.com/Orwell/site/opinion/essays/storgaa

rd1.html

 

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.  2013.  Thomas Hobbes. Accessed November 10, 2013.  Available at http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes/

 

The European Graduate School.Thomas Hobbes – Biography.  Accessed on November 11, 2013.  Available at http://www.egs.edu/library/thomas-hobbes/biography/

 

Wikipedia Organization.  2013.  Constitutional monarchy.Accessed on November 13, 2013.  Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_monarchy

 

Wikipedia, Organization.  Thomas Hobbes.Accessed on November 11, 2013.  Available at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Hobbes

 

anakbeong.blogspot.com,SocialBar_1,24187607,"" https://lipsgig.com/q9h97sj5?key=23b279e99ed6a529a30f577cdce2aeb9

Hannah Arendt on the Wordlessness and Crimes against Humanity

  Yosef Keladu University of St. Thomas, Manila, Philippines Abstract: This paper attempts to investigate Arendt’s idea that crimes against ...