I find Hobbes tiresome to read. What are the most importiant chapters i should read?
I find Hobbes tiresome to read. What are the most importiant chapters i should read?
Gavin Parker
Michael Green
He's literally one of the easiest and most interesting philosophers to read. Eat the book if you're having trouble digesting something this straightforward.
Adrian Garcia
I just finished the 60 page introduction to leviathan, and finally got to the actual book. The language is so dated, how is this even English anymore? Everything is spelled wrong, and his use of filler words is astounding. It’s not as bad as Christian philosophers, but really anything past 1800 seems easier to read than this natural law bullshit.
Gabriel Perry
Chapters XI - XXXI
Brayden Hernandez
you're a retard and you don't know english
use a dictionary, retard
Jayden Green
Buy Leo Strauss's 'Natural Right and History'
Read the Chapter on Hobbes.
Be done with Hobbes.
Christian James
Oh thats great advice, user! Thanks for the tip! I'm glad you spent the time crafting such a quality post.
Hunter Morris
You have to go back, this is an 18+ board with some standards. English is my fourth language and Leviathan is not a difficult read.
Christian Morris
Read Carl Schmitt to get the updated version
Kevin Anderson
It is not that hard user. I was concerned when I picked up Leviathan for the first time, but within the first couple of pages I had fallen into the rhythm of things. I understand it can look intimidating at first but the differences between his language and the kind we use today is not that vast, almost cosmetic seeing as how it comes down largely to archaic punctuation + spelling. If you can read a book from the 18th century, with less streamlined and meandering sentence structures then you can handle Hobbes. The whole board is cheering for you user, you can do it!
Zachary Myers
Chapter IV could be interesting for writers...
Anthony Foster
Carl Schmitt was short-sighted. We can have any number of non-human external threats to bind society together through the shared interests of different groups to sublimate the conflicts between these. Climate change, disease, food shortages, the threat of falling into conflict itself, etc. Public choice theory offers a better approach to conflict than does Schmitt or Marx.
Not to mention that public choice theory hasn't backed a terrible state yet, unlike Schmitt's and Marxism.
Brayden Ortiz
>the threat of falling into conflict itself
The bourgeois is an individual who does not want to leave the apolitical riskless private sphere. He rests in the possession of his private property, and under the justification of his possessive individualism he acts as an individual against the totality. He is a man who finds his compensation for his political nullity in the fruits of freedom and enrichment and above all in the total security of its use. Consequently he wants to be spared bravery and exempted from the danger of a violent death.
>clinate change, disease, food shortages
Calling them spooks is overstating their poltical relevance.
Mason Lopez
ebin post blud for de blud dog :DDDDD
Camden Brooks
None of it is important.
It's just some random fucking guy's opinion.
Who cares?
Zachary Long
>The bourgeois
Don't exist
Camden Edwards
It's a direct quote from The Concept of the Political you illiterate swine.
Asher Myers
And I told you I find Schmitt short-sighted. Why did you think quoting his work to me would change my mind?
Jaxson Ross
Isaiah Gonzalez
>external threats to bind society together
What does this have to do with Schmitt?
Isaiah Bailey
Schmitt argued that the role of the state was to manage conflict which was inevitable because differences beget opposition. The state can give the people an "other" to direct conflicting interest groups against. Otherwise these groups will themselves pick some "other" themselves, perhaps even the state.