The state of nature, in moral and political philosophy, religion, social contract theories and international law, is the hypothetical life of people before societies came into existence.[1] Philosophers of the state of nature theory deduce that there must have been a time before organized societies existed, and this presumption thus raises questions such as: "What was life like before civil society?"; "How did government first emerge from such a starting position?," and; "What are the hypothetical reasons for entering a state of society by establishing a nation-state?".
In such condition, there is no place for industry; because the fruit thereof is uncertain: and consequently no culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; no commodious building; no instruments of moving, and removing, such things as require much force; no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.[34]
Jean-Jacques Rousseau[edit]
Hobbes' view was challenged in the eighteenth century[10] by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who claimed that Hobbes was taking socialized people and simply imagining them living outside of the society in which they were raised. He affirmed instead that people were neither good nor bad, but were born as a blank slate, and later society and the environment influence which way we lean. In Rousseau's state of nature, people did not know each other enough to come into serious conflict and they did have normal values. The modern society, and the ownership it entails, is blamed for the disruption of the state of nature which Rousseau sees as true freedom.[11]
The State of Nature is indeed a hypothetical construct. As far as we know, humans have always been social animals and, as such, have always operated under a hierarchal imperative. The modern nation state is the result of the evolutionary progression from family to clan to tribe and so forth. Generally, the larger the group, the more organizational structure it needs to function efficiently but, even in small groups, somebody has to take charge or nothing gets done.
Hunting may be more fun than grubbing in the dirt, but not when game becomes scarce and you come home empty handed to your hungry family.
No comments:
Post a Comment