Discussion Topic 2 – Posts 2 Pages  

Hobbes runs the logic like this in the form of a logical syllogism:

1)  We are all self-interested,

2)  Each of us needs to have a peaceful and cooperative social order to pursue our interests,

3)  We need moral rules in order to establish and maintain a cooperative social order.

Therefore, self-interest motivates us to establish moral rules.

Thomas Hobbes looked to the past to observe a primitive “State of Nature” in which there is no such thing as morality, and that this self-interested human nature was “nasty, brutish, and short” — a kind of perpetual state of warfare

Which philosophy do you espouse?  In coming to grips with the two and considering your experience of society as it is today, think out loud about what you experiences as the State of Nature, and tell us what you would be willing to give up in exchange for civil order and personal security?

You might consider what you have already given up in exchange for security as well as what might be required in coming days.  Let’s start with our philosophers. Who do you agree with Hobbes or Locke?…

Ethics of Controlling Environmental Innovation and Kant – Accomplice to Crazed Murderer?