2007-08 AM Theories of Knowledge and Society: Hobbes, Locke, Shaftesbury and Mandeville

From Angl-Am
Revision as of 21:55, 26 November 2007 by Olaf Simons (Talk | contribs)

Jump to: navigation, search
Neuer Ort: Sporttrakt

Lektüre auf Montag 5. Nov. Leviathan "On Man"

  • Time: Mo 18-20
  • Place: S 2-203 (im Sporttrakt)
  • Contact: Olaf Simons

Hobbes, Locke, Shaftesbury and Mandeville have become central figures of all modern debates of philosophy and society: Hobbes as the prime advocate of absolutism, Locke as the philosopher behind the American constitution, Shaftesbury became famous with the fashion of 18th-century sentimentalism, Mandeville is read today as the first proponent of what came to be known as liberalism. The debate these authors unfolded showed a strange readiness to base theories of how men should live together on new theories of knowledge. One could say they simply reacted on the scientific progress their age. The arguments they produced had, however, implications far beyond the new fields of research: they were immediately suspected of atheism and seen as attacks on the moral foundations human society rested on.

The seminar will focus on Hobbes and Locke. We will read and discuss passages of their texts to understand how they managed to reach beyond the strictly philosophical debate. Religion and politics will be of key interest here. The seminar should at the same moment provide a good background for individual explorations of 17th- and 18th-century plays, poems and novels which have been read as influenced by the philosophical debate and the enlightenment it is supposed to have spread.

Oct 22, 2007: Course Outline

We discussed the general course outline. First aim to read Hobbes "of Man" and in a survey: "of Common-Wealth". Homework read into Leviathan up to p.17 original pagination.

Oct 29, 2007: Hobbes and his common sense - the beginning

We spoke about the frontispiece and the program of Hobbes' Leviathan - and we read into the beginning. Hobbes, so the impression, is "straight forward" and "common sense", though it seemed not quite clear why he should begin a book on Government with remarks on the nature of man and human knowledge. A look at the topics he touched allowed another question: which are the topics he does not touch? What does he say about the soul? We had a brief discussion on alternative theories of knowledge - theories accepting ideas as the primary matter of our understanding.

Nov 5, 2007: Part I "On Man": Power, self preservation and war of all against all

Reading - Part I "On Man" - p.85 original pagination. Do not try to understand everything - do rather get a general idea of what Hobbes is trying to state.

Discussion of important passages: definition of power p.41 (original pagination), reputation is (also) power. p.42 "Value or Worth of a Man" - what would I pay for his services. p.60: "Man are by nature equal" - slow reading up to p.64: "bellum omnium contra omnes". There is no sin in human actions, they are not criminal as long as there is no law.

Nov 12, 2007: Justice

Discussion: p.71-72 Justice - theories of justice. Radebruch'sche Formel: a judge may decide against the law if the law is unjust - cf. Nazi laws.

Different options to define justice: harmony, divine command, a natural law, a human creation.

Aims of justice:

  • Everybody gets the same
  • Everybody gets what he needs - seems to be just, e.g. somebody ill - will get treatment even if he cannot work, even if he never will be able to work - yet we also believe:
  • Those who work harder should get more.
  • Is the working rich man allowed to transfer his wealth into the hands of his heirs (who have not done anything to justly gain that wealth?)
  • Is everything just that is acquired by just means? (Which just transfers the problem of justice to the acquisition)?
  • Are Nazi laws in that case unjust as they have not been implemented in a just process.
  • Would we like to get into a position in which justice was not man made? Whose creation would it then be?

Rawlin's Theory of Justice (1971): If we had to accept the rules before we entered the game, we would not opt for Utilitarianism (greatest happiness of the greatest number), as we could not know whether we would end up in the greatest number or in the minority position. We would rather opt for a system in which the handicapped could enjoy protection.

We discussed options and compared these with Hobbes' decisions.

Nov 19, 2007: The state and monarchy in particular

Reading - The chapter "Of Commonwealth" - p.86-114 original pagination.

Discussion: close reading of p.87 to Beginning of Chapter XVIII: Contract theory - the covenant, made by men with their fellow men. Sound sensible - yet it creates a ruler who is not bound by any laws - he gets the power yet he is not partner in the contract (nor can God be that partner).

We payed special attention to the last paragraphs of Chapter XVII and the question what this meant for the Common Wealth and Cromwell's Government.

We then discussed the different options of gouvernment - all exert power - yet they are equally effective when it comes to preserving this power.

Monarchy as the form of gouvernment in which personal ambition (to preserve ones life) is best connected with the general aim to have a strong ruler who can effectively forbid the war of all against all.

Nov 28, 2007: Hobbes and Locke - share rationality

Homework: read Locke's Second Essay of Government I-IV.

Discussion: Creationism - Locke and Hobbes believed in a world created some 4004 years BC. How did this belief end - in the scientific community. (The problem of the short history - Noah's sons must be the fathers of all humans on earth (and began their settlement around 2300 BC). What about Babel? European 17th century scholars dismissed the idea that Scandinavians or Germans could have returned to Babel - and began to consider their languages to be the oldest on Earth. Geological findings and historical research demanded a longer history. It was implemented from the 18th into the 19th century.

Question: Can God be a deceiver, someone who supplied a world which looks older than 6000 years? Descartes and the option to arge with a god who won't deceive us.

Back to Locke: Discussion of his State and Law of Nature, §§ 5 and 19. Question is this state of Nature a fiction? Locke on this question § 14. Kings live in the state of nature! That seemed odd - what will then happen if we get beyond the state of nature? Look back to political situation: William III a king called by parliament. (Parliament did not call for a king in 1649...

Comparison of Locke and Hobbes: Both share the argument of man - what would he do if he met others without a superior power telling him what to do and what not to do. Hobes: It is rational if he kills before he gets killed. Locke and Hobbes: Everyone has a right to live and to protect his life. Locke: No is then allowed to transgress this law - if he attempts to kill me, I am justified to defend myself.

Hobbes and Lock argue that man will act rationally. Is this an enlightened position or a clever position in which neither church nor God will have a chance to make laws?

We had no time to look into capital punishment and the question of who will have power over whom. Is power transferred?

Dec 3, 2007: Liberty, property and the best political constitution

Homework: read Locke's Second Essay of Government V-XV

Dec 10, 2007

Homework: finish Locke's Second Essay of Government (XVI-XIX)

Dec 17, 2007

Homework: Session at my place - either with a look back on Locke's 2nd treatise or with selected passages from his Essay Concerning Humane Understanding, in order to determine whether Theory of Knowledge still is a political tool (as it was in Hobbe's Leviathan).

Jan 7, 2007

  • Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 3rd Earl of Shaftesbury. An Inquiry Concerning Virtue or Merit. London, 1699.

Jan 14, 2007

  • Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 3rd Earl of Shaftesbury. An Inquiry Concerning Virtue or Merit. London, 1699.

Jan 21, 2007

  • Bernard Mandeville. Fable of the Bees. 3nd edition. London, 1724.

Jan 28, 2007

  • Bernard Mandeville. Fable of the Bees. 3nd edition. London, 1724.

Feb 4, 2007

Literature

Retrieved from "https://wiki.angl-am.uni-oldenburg.de/index.php?title=2007-08_AM_Theories_of_Knowledge_and_Society:_Hobbes,_Locke,_Shaftesbury_and_Mandeville&oldid=8428"