Revista Filosofía UIS

Vol. 14 No. 1 (2015): Revista Filosofía UIS
Research Article

Self-preservation as a fundament of moral in Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan

PDF (Español (España))
  • Andrés Sandoval Sarrias
Andrés Sandoval Sarrias
Universidad del Valle
Bio
DOI: https://doi.org/10.18273/revfil.v14n1-2015004

Published 2015-06-05

Keywords

  • moral,
  • self-preservation,
  • justice,
  • state of nature attenuated,
  • covenant

How to Cite

Sandoval Sarrias, A. (2015). Self-preservation as a fundament of moral in Thomas Hobbes’s Leviathan. Revista Filosofía UIS, 14(1), 73–94. https://doi.org/10.18273/revfil.v14n1-2015004

Copyright (c) 2015 Andrés Sandoval Sarrias

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

Interpretations of Hobbes's Moral may be divided into three interpretative readings: Egoistic Reading (ER), Naturalist Reading (NR), and Individualist or Voluntarist Reading (VR). In this paper, I will argue in favor of a fourth interpretation understood as an agreement (AR). I will argue that only this version satisfies Self Preservation Hobbes' principle and also brings an answer to the question: Who protects the initial covenant that gave rise to the State whether by this time there is not supreme power and it is in a state of nature when is not rational to comply with the covenants? I will support the idea of an operating moral in a state of nature attenuated that leads to the initial pact which founds the Civil State.

PDF (Español (España))

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Gauthier, D. (1977). “The Social Contract as Ideology”. Philosophical Review. 88 (10). pp. 547-559.
  2. Gauthier, D. (1994). La moral por acuerdo. Barcelona: Gedisa.
  3. Hampton, J. (1986). Hobbes's and the Social Contract Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  4. Harvey, M. (2009). “Hobbes's Voluntarist Theory of Morals”. Hobbes Studies. 22 (1). pp. 49-69.
  5. Hobbes T. (1994). El Leviatán. México D.F: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
  6. Kavka, G. (1986). Hobbesian Moral and Political Theory. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  7. Lloyd, S.A. (2009). Morality in the Philosophy of Thomas Hobbes. London: Cambridge University Press.
  8. Lloyd, S.A. (2010). “The Moral Philosophy of Thomas Hobbes: A Reply to Critics”. Hobbes Studies. 15 (2). pp. 180-187.
  9. Martínez, M. (2008). Hobbes y la moral egoísta en el estado de naturaleza. Revista Ideas y Valores. VI (136). pp. 5-26.
  10. Nagel. T. (2004). La Posibilidad del Altruismo. México: Fondo de cultura económica.
  11. Raphael, D.D. (1977). Hobbes Morals and Politics. London: British Library Cataloguing.
  12. Rosas, A. (2011). “La evolución de la moral contractual”. Revista Ideas y Valores. IX (147). pp. 209 – 222.
  13. Strauss, L. (2006). La filosofía política de Hobbes. Su fundamento y su génesis. Buenos Aires: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
  14. Taylor, A.E. (1938). “The Ethical Doctrine of Hobbes”. Philosophy. 13 (52). pp. 406-424.
  15. Warrender, H. (1957). The Political Philosophy of Thomas Hobbes: His Theory of Obligation. London: Oxford University Press.
  16. Watkins, L.W.N. (1972). Qué ha dicho verdaderamente Hobbes. Madrid: Doncel.