• OpenAccess
    • List of Articles Hobbes

      • Open Access Article

        1 - Anthropological Principles of Hobbes and Spinoza on Government (A Historical Overview)
        Bayan Karimy Seyyed Mustafa  Shahraeini
        Hobbes and Spinoza are among the philosophers who believe in the necessity of dealing with political philosophy. They maintain that their political philosophies are systematically related to metaphysics and the anthropology that originates in it. In this regard, their v More
        Hobbes and Spinoza are among the philosophers who believe in the necessity of dealing with political philosophy. They maintain that their political philosophies are systematically related to metaphysics and the anthropology that originates in it. In this regard, their views are clearly different from those of their predecessors and even from those of Descartes, who is almost contemporary with them. Spinoza has been influenced by Hobbes in some respects; however, because of the differences between the logic and general philosophy of each of them, there are some noteworthy differences between these two philosophers’ anthropological interpretations and the functions of their political philosophy. The main purpose of the present paper is to highlight the historical background of political philosophy in ancient Greece, particularly during the Middle Ages. While challenging this historical background, it also aims to discover the explicit and implicit metaphysical and anthropological principles and assumptions underlying the views of Hobbes and Spinoza regarding a desirable government and report the differences and similarities between them. The authors intend to demonstrate that Spinoza’s political philosophy is based on ethics and reason. The distinctive feature of his philosophy is its love of human beings and reason. On the other hand, Hobbes’ political philosophy is based on the senses, and its distinctive feature is having a pessimistic view of human beings and presenting a material interpretation of their nature. Accordingly, the principle of preserving the essence in Hobbes’ view is limited to preserving the body, and a superior government means absolute monarchy, the sole purpose of which is protecting the lives of its citizens and establishing security in society. Nevertheless, in Spinoza’s view, protecting the essence is beyond the protection of the body and extends to reason, perhaps even more than the body, because human essence mainly depends on their reason rather than their body. Hence a superior government in Spinoza’s view is of a democratic nature. He also emphasizes the role of government in promoting the human culture and the necessity of educational and ethical policy-making. Manuscript profile
      • Open Access Article

        2 - A Critical Study of Empiricists’ Theories of Natural Law in Modern Period
        Mohammad Hosein Talebi
        The doctrine of “natural law” is one of the oldest and most famous and efficient subjects of practical wisdom in Western philosophy. This theorem is employed in various fields of human sciences such as philosophy, anthropology, ethics, law, political science, education, More
        The doctrine of “natural law” is one of the oldest and most famous and efficient subjects of practical wisdom in Western philosophy. This theorem is employed in various fields of human sciences such as philosophy, anthropology, ethics, law, political science, education, and sociology. Unlike Muslim philosophers, Western thinkers have provided several theories about this doctrine. According to their most famous interpretation, natural law is a system of law based on the orders of practical wisdom regarding the behaviors of human beings in order to attain happiness. The purpose of this study is to investigate modern empiricists’ philosophy concerning the natural law and explain the defects of their views following a rational and critical approach and based on philosophical arguments. The interpretation of the thinkers of the modern period (17th and 18th centuries), such as Thomas Hobbes and John Lock, of the rational doctrine of the natural law is an empiricist one. According to this interpretation, since the spirit of positivism dominated the thoughts of empiricists, the immateriality of the human soul was generally unacceptable to them. They only observed the human nature in order to explain the natural law and did not go beyond the satisfaction of human natural and material desires. They neglected the social interests of human being while the natural law always reinforces the orders of practical intellect for the development and progress of the humankind in all material and spiritual, personal and communal, and social affairs. The outcome of their approach to the natural law only directs people towards moral and material joys and delights and closes their eyes to everything that pertains to their everlasting and spiritual life in the hereafter. Therefore, the right to life and freedom, which is one of the concomitants of the natural law in the empiricism of modern Western civilization, mainly targets only material life and freedom. This approach results in ignoring a large part of the world of reality, that is, metaphysical affairs. This philosophy paved the context for the vast dominance of positivism over all aspects of human life in the 19th century and granted an empirical nature to all sciences. As a result, rational discussions, particularly those in relation to the natural law remained dormant for more than a whole century. Manuscript profile