Examining Absolute Sovereignty's Function in Preserving Social Order: A Study of Thomas Hobbes' Political Philosophy.

The foundation of human nature defines most academic arguments about political organizations since an individual’s view of humanity directly affects their recommendations for governing societies. All three foundations of justice and commerce and cultural life need faith in an ultimate arbitrator for handling disputes. Individuals need to give their consent for giving up their natural rights to all other people in order to establish rule by the Leviathan a supreme governing body. The research conducted an analysis of government perspectives according to Thomas Hobbes through a bibliographic investigation into Hobbesian philosophical works. Hobbes determined monarchy to be the best way in which sovereignty could be established. According to Hobbes all executive power should be directed under a monarch to produce more focused unified political control. According to Hobbes the social contract existed solely between citizens whereas it did not extend to include the relationship between people and their sovereign. The king gained absolute power which barred the public from starting a revolution through their own actions. In a manner similar to Hobbes he stated that the administration of the monarch should avoid Clerical interference. The religious conflicts between subjects threatened to start a civil war that would threaten societal harmony. As per his proposals the church needed must remain under royal administrative control with enhanced spiritual supervision measures. Hobbes declares that people must obey royal commands above all else whenever divine and royal laws clash.

Leviathan, Political philosophy, Sovereignty, Thomas Hobbes.

1. Hobbes, T. (1651/1996). Leviathan (R. Tuck, Ed.). Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Macpherson, C. B. (1962). The political theory of possessive individualism: Hobbes to Locke. Oxford, England: Clarendon Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Oakeshott, M. (1975). Hobbes on civil association. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Skinner, Q. (1996). Reason and rhetoric in the philosophy of Hobbes. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Tuck, R. (2002). Hobbes: A very short introduction. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Articles [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Gauthier, D. (1979). The logic of Leviathan: The moral and political theory of Thomas Hobbes. The [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Philosophical Review, 88(1), 68–91. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Hampton, J. (1986). Hobbes and the social contract tradition. Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and Public Policy, 3(1), 1–24. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Hoekstra, K. (2004). Hobbes on law, nature, and reason. Journal of Moral Philosophy, 1(1), 35–55. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Lloyd, S. A. (1992). Hobbes' moral and political philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from https://plato.stanford.edu [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Edited Collections [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Lloyd, S. A. (Ed.). (2001). Routledge philosophy guidebook to Hobbes and Leviathan. London, England: Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Martinich, A. P. (2005). Hobbes: A biography. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Slomp, G. (2000). Thomas Hobbes and the political philosophy of glory. London, England: Palgrave Macmillan. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Sorell, T. (Ed.). (1996). The Cambridge companion to Hobbes. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Strauss, L. (1963). The political philosophy of Hobbes: Its basis and genesis. Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Footnotes: [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, ed. Richard Tuck (1996), p. 89. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (1651). Chapter 13: "Of the Natural Condition of Mankind as Concerning Their Felicity and Misery." Hobbes uses this phrase to describe the inherent dangers of the state of nature in which humans are in constant conflict due to their selfish desires and fears, p.148. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Ibid. Chapter 13: Hobbes famously describes the state of nature as a "war of all against all," emphasizing humans' competitive and violent instincts in the absence of governance, p.77 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, ed. Richard Tuck (1996), p. 120. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (1651). Chapter 14: "Of the First and Second Natural Laws and Contracts." The social contract is a central mechanism by which individuals give up their natural freedoms in exchange for security, p.81. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Ibid., Chapter 18: Hobbes clarifies that the social contract does not bind the sovereign and that the people must obey unconditionally, p.109. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Ibid., Chapter 32: Hobbes argues that religious leaders should not possess authority that competes with the sovereign to avoid sectarian conflict destabilizing the state, p.229. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Lloyd, S. A. (2001), p. 98. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan (1651). Chapter 36: Hobbes states that in cases of conflict between divine and royal law, the sovereign's command must be obeyed, as the sovereign is the ultimate authority. p.257. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Ibid., Chapter 21: Hobbes explains that rebellion against the sovereign is forbidden, even if the sovereign acts unjustly, p. 129. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Lloyd, S. A. (2001), p. 45. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Sorell, T. (Ed.). (1996). p. 126. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Aristotelian Ethics and Moral Development: A Critical Evaluation
• Decolonising Africa’s Higher Education against violence and social injustices.
• The African Child as a Technological Citizen
• Mathematics as Ontological–Cognitive Participation: Reconstructing Ethical and Metaphysical Foundations within a Humanized Mathematical Universe
• Reason–Emotion Integration in the Context of Artificial Intelligence: The Implications of Aristotle’s Conception of Happiness for Youth Moral Education