Hobbe's Law of Nature

Hobbes claims that we should be moral because of our best interest, which is to do everything we can to ensure our survival. The problem with this is that not everyone is feared of death, as Hobbes assumed. Hobbes' reply to that would be under normal circumstances, it is still our basic instinct to protect and ensure our survival.

By definition of Hobbes, the State of Nature is a state where "everyman is in war with everyman" (Johnson and Reath 142). This is derived from the fact that all men are to a certain extent, equal in power and abilities (Johnson and Reath 141). The State of Nature is a theoretical construct, it did not, and it will not exist because there are laws, which Hobbes referred to as the Laws of Nature.

The Laws of Nature are a set of logical rules that everyone ought to follow in the assumption that all men are feared of death, and have a desire to live (Johnson and Reath 143). The fundamental Law of Nature states that everyman should attempt their best effort to seek peace (Johnson and Reath 144). If this principle rule is not followed, then we would result in the State of Nature. The Second Law of Nature states that we should give up some of our rights to prevent the state of war in times when others are willing to do so (Johnson and Reath 144). Our rights, as Hobbes referred to as the Natural Rights, are the rights to all, which only exists under the State of Nature. This means that, even if it is our right to kill someone, we would not do so, in prevention of war. These two Laws set forth the conditions for the Laws that are to follow. The Third Law of Nature states that we should commit ourselves to the covenant (Johnson and Reath 145). This is keeping our promise to seek peace and give up our rights to all.

The basic idea behind Hobbes' Law of nature is based on the assumption that "every human have fear for death and wants to live, and therefore, will do anything that ensures their existence." However, objections to Hobbes can raise the point that there are people who are not afraid of death. In an instance, it is possible to see someone scarifying themselves for their loved ones, or situations where people suicide. These are counterexamples that violated Hobbes' assumption. Thus, Hobbes' argument for why we should be moral would be invalid.

The best reply to that objection is that people who are not afraid of death have reason to be