This weeks reading assignment was on the ideas of Classical Conservatist and Liberals, I'm going to do one post on each of these ideas. This post will be on the Classical Conservatives view of Human Nature.
The main focus on the classical conservative view is Hobbes and his views on human nature. Hobbes stood firm on the idea that "human beings are pleasure-seeking machines who invented government as a social contract" and that "nature simply consists of bodies in motion".
I disagree with these ideas because they are basically stating that humans have no free will. Saying that humans have no free will is like saying that everything we do in life is pointless. That, every time we do something and thinks it's out of free will it's really something that has already been planned out for us. Well, not even "planned" out but more predestined and there's nothing you can do about that. It's similar to the idea Aristotle held that you may think you are happy but are you really happy; you may think you're acting of free will but are you really acting out of free will.
If humans have no free will then everything we do is basically pointless. Why should we worry about schoolwork, social relationships, or even the future if it doesn't even make a difference. Basically, I don't like Hobbes ideas that "nature consists of bodies in motion" and that "human beings are pleasure seeking machines who invented government as a social contract" because it makes me feel hopeless and like there's no reason for me to care anymore.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I mean I guess you could look at it as humans have no free will but I feel like Hobbes is just trying to get to the core of human nature. If you really take a look at it, his comparing us to machines is not that far fetched. Our human nature is to be self centered. I guess I also look at it as building blocks. You have us as machines and then everything piles on from there?
Post a Comment