Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature

Autores
Rosler, Andres Bernardo
Año de publicación
2011
Idioma
inglés
Tipo de recurso
artículo
Estado
versión publicada
Descripción
Very few-if any-will doubt Hobbes's aversion to the state of nature and sympathy for civil society. On the other hand, it is not quite news that it would be inaccurate to claim that Hobbes rejected the state of nature entirely. Indeed, he embraced or at the very least tolerated the state of nature at the international level in order to escape from the individual state of nature. Hobbes's recommended exchange of an individual state of nature for an international one does seem to have a smack of contradiction, arguably first noted by Rousseau. There is yet another charge of contradiction lurking around Hobbes's account of the state of nature. Hobbes's political thought would still reflect an ambivalent attitude towards a third instantiation of the state of nature, i.e. civil war. This is one of the main reasons why the political allegiance of Thomas Hobbes has been an issue ever since the publication of De Cive at the very least. This paper deals with Hobbes's differential treatment of the original and the international states of nature and discusses the source of Hobbes's somewhat ambivalent attitude towards civil war. It is here argued that Hobbes can fairly hold his ground vis-à-vis Rousseau's criticism, in spite of the normative resemblance between the international state of nature and the initial state of nature, and that Hobbes ambivalent attitude of attraction and repulsion towards civil war is actually due not so much to opportunism on his part as to the normative autonomy he has granted to the state of nature.
Fil: Rosler, Andres Bernardo. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Departamento de Filosofía; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Materia
CIVIL WAR
NEGATIVE ASSOCIATION
STATE OF NATURE
WAR
Nivel de accesibilidad
acceso abierto
Condiciones de uso
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
Repositorio
CONICET Digital (CONICET)
Institución
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
OAI Identificador
oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/192456

id CONICETDig_17cc64718a6cb3fee053c9448968ffd8
oai_identifier_str oai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/192456
network_acronym_str CONICETDig
repository_id_str 3498
network_name_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
spelling Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of natureRosler, Andres BernardoCIVIL WARNEGATIVE ASSOCIATIONSTATE OF NATUREWARhttps://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6Very few-if any-will doubt Hobbes's aversion to the state of nature and sympathy for civil society. On the other hand, it is not quite news that it would be inaccurate to claim that Hobbes rejected the state of nature entirely. Indeed, he embraced or at the very least tolerated the state of nature at the international level in order to escape from the individual state of nature. Hobbes's recommended exchange of an individual state of nature for an international one does seem to have a smack of contradiction, arguably first noted by Rousseau. There is yet another charge of contradiction lurking around Hobbes's account of the state of nature. Hobbes's political thought would still reflect an ambivalent attitude towards a third instantiation of the state of nature, i.e. civil war. This is one of the main reasons why the political allegiance of Thomas Hobbes has been an issue ever since the publication of De Cive at the very least. This paper deals with Hobbes's differential treatment of the original and the international states of nature and discusses the source of Hobbes's somewhat ambivalent attitude towards civil war. It is here argued that Hobbes can fairly hold his ground vis-à-vis Rousseau's criticism, in spite of the normative resemblance between the international state of nature and the initial state of nature, and that Hobbes ambivalent attitude of attraction and repulsion towards civil war is actually due not so much to opportunism on his part as to the normative autonomy he has granted to the state of nature.Fil: Rosler, Andres Bernardo. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Departamento de Filosofía; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaBrill Academic Publishers2011-06info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/11336/192456Rosler, Andres Bernardo; Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature; Brill Academic Publishers; Hobbes Studies; 24; 1; 6-2011; 91-1110921-58911875-0257CONICET DigitalCONICETenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://brill.com/view/journals/hobs/24/1/article-p91_8.xmlinfo:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1163/187502511X563826info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas2025-09-29T09:46:16Zoai:ri.conicet.gov.ar:11336/192456instacron:CONICETInstitucionalhttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://ri.conicet.gov.ar/oai/requestdasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:34982025-09-29 09:46:17.166CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicasfalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature
title Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature
spellingShingle Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature
Rosler, Andres Bernardo
CIVIL WAR
NEGATIVE ASSOCIATION
STATE OF NATURE
WAR
title_short Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature
title_full Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature
title_fullStr Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature
title_full_unstemmed Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature
title_sort Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Rosler, Andres Bernardo
author Rosler, Andres Bernardo
author_facet Rosler, Andres Bernardo
author_role author
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv CIVIL WAR
NEGATIVE ASSOCIATION
STATE OF NATURE
WAR
topic CIVIL WAR
NEGATIVE ASSOCIATION
STATE OF NATURE
WAR
purl_subject.fl_str_mv https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6.3
https://purl.org/becyt/ford/6
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv Very few-if any-will doubt Hobbes's aversion to the state of nature and sympathy for civil society. On the other hand, it is not quite news that it would be inaccurate to claim that Hobbes rejected the state of nature entirely. Indeed, he embraced or at the very least tolerated the state of nature at the international level in order to escape from the individual state of nature. Hobbes's recommended exchange of an individual state of nature for an international one does seem to have a smack of contradiction, arguably first noted by Rousseau. There is yet another charge of contradiction lurking around Hobbes's account of the state of nature. Hobbes's political thought would still reflect an ambivalent attitude towards a third instantiation of the state of nature, i.e. civil war. This is one of the main reasons why the political allegiance of Thomas Hobbes has been an issue ever since the publication of De Cive at the very least. This paper deals with Hobbes's differential treatment of the original and the international states of nature and discusses the source of Hobbes's somewhat ambivalent attitude towards civil war. It is here argued that Hobbes can fairly hold his ground vis-à-vis Rousseau's criticism, in spite of the normative resemblance between the international state of nature and the initial state of nature, and that Hobbes ambivalent attitude of attraction and repulsion towards civil war is actually due not so much to opportunism on his part as to the normative autonomy he has granted to the state of nature.
Fil: Rosler, Andres Bernardo. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Filosofía y Letras. Departamento de Filosofía; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
description Very few-if any-will doubt Hobbes's aversion to the state of nature and sympathy for civil society. On the other hand, it is not quite news that it would be inaccurate to claim that Hobbes rejected the state of nature entirely. Indeed, he embraced or at the very least tolerated the state of nature at the international level in order to escape from the individual state of nature. Hobbes's recommended exchange of an individual state of nature for an international one does seem to have a smack of contradiction, arguably first noted by Rousseau. There is yet another charge of contradiction lurking around Hobbes's account of the state of nature. Hobbes's political thought would still reflect an ambivalent attitude towards a third instantiation of the state of nature, i.e. civil war. This is one of the main reasons why the political allegiance of Thomas Hobbes has been an issue ever since the publication of De Cive at the very least. This paper deals with Hobbes's differential treatment of the original and the international states of nature and discusses the source of Hobbes's somewhat ambivalent attitude towards civil war. It is here argued that Hobbes can fairly hold his ground vis-à-vis Rousseau's criticism, in spite of the normative resemblance between the international state of nature and the initial state of nature, and that Hobbes ambivalent attitude of attraction and repulsion towards civil war is actually due not so much to opportunism on his part as to the normative autonomy he has granted to the state of nature.
publishDate 2011
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2011-06
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/11336/192456
Rosler, Andres Bernardo; Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature; Brill Academic Publishers; Hobbes Studies; 24; 1; 6-2011; 91-111
0921-5891
1875-0257
CONICET Digital
CONICET
url http://hdl.handle.net/11336/192456
identifier_str_mv Rosler, Andres Bernardo; Odi et Amo? Hobbes on the state of nature; Brill Academic Publishers; Hobbes Studies; 24; 1; 6-2011; 91-111
0921-5891
1875-0257
CONICET Digital
CONICET
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/url/https://brill.com/view/journals/hobs/24/1/article-p91_8.xml
info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.1163/187502511X563826
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ar/
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Brill Academic Publishers
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Brill Academic Publishers
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname:Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
reponame_str CONICET Digital (CONICET)
collection CONICET Digital (CONICET)
instname_str Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.name.fl_str_mv CONICET Digital (CONICET) - Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas
repository.mail.fl_str_mv dasensio@conicet.gov.ar; lcarlino@conicet.gov.ar
_version_ 1844613445749571584
score 13.070432