{"title":"Hobbes Among the Savages: Politics, War, and Enmity in the State of Nature","authors":"Allan M. Hillani","doi":"10.1163/18750257-bja10057","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nIn this article I argue that Thomas Hobbes’s theory of the “state of nature” should be understood as describing a thoroughly political situation. Hobbes’s exemplification of the state of nature by resorting to the “savages” of America should be taken in its ultimately paradoxical character, one that puts in question the stark opposition between a prepolitical natural state and the properly political state resulting from the “social contract.” Through the lenses of ethnographic studies and anthropological theory, I propose a reinterpretation of Hobbes’s characterization of the state of nature as a state of war. In the first section, I present my interpretation of Hobbes’s understanding of war, arguing that war is characterized not by actual battle but by the uncertainty of conflict, already entailing a social dimension to it. In the second section, I engage with Pierre Clastres’s theory of the society against the State to discuss how, for Amerindian peoples, war not only has a social character but is itself the basis of sociality. In the last section, I discuss Eduardo Viveiros de Castro’s theory of potential affinity to propose that Hobbes’s state of nature is also a form of schematization of alterity as enmity. I conclude by showing how this provides an understanding of peace as a precarious situation, one that is the outcome of ethical practices ultimately independent from the State.","PeriodicalId":42474,"journal":{"name":"Hobbes Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Hobbes Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18750257-bja10057","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
In this article I argue that Thomas Hobbes’s theory of the “state of nature” should be understood as describing a thoroughly political situation. Hobbes’s exemplification of the state of nature by resorting to the “savages” of America should be taken in its ultimately paradoxical character, one that puts in question the stark opposition between a prepolitical natural state and the properly political state resulting from the “social contract.” Through the lenses of ethnographic studies and anthropological theory, I propose a reinterpretation of Hobbes’s characterization of the state of nature as a state of war. In the first section, I present my interpretation of Hobbes’s understanding of war, arguing that war is characterized not by actual battle but by the uncertainty of conflict, already entailing a social dimension to it. In the second section, I engage with Pierre Clastres’s theory of the society against the State to discuss how, for Amerindian peoples, war not only has a social character but is itself the basis of sociality. In the last section, I discuss Eduardo Viveiros de Castro’s theory of potential affinity to propose that Hobbes’s state of nature is also a form of schematization of alterity as enmity. I conclude by showing how this provides an understanding of peace as a precarious situation, one that is the outcome of ethical practices ultimately independent from the State.
在这篇文章中,我认为托马斯·霍布斯的“自然状态”理论应该被理解为描述一个彻底的政治状况。霍布斯以美国的“野蛮人”作为自然状态的例证,应该被理解为其最终的矛盾特征,它提出了一个问题,即前政治的自然状态与由“社会契约”产生的适当的政治状态之间的鲜明对立。通过民族志研究和人类学理论的镜头,我提议重新解释霍布斯将自然状态描述为战争状态的特征。在第一部分,我阐述了我对霍布斯对战争的理解的解释,认为战争的特点不是实际的战斗,而是冲突的不确定性,已经包含了社会维度。在第二部分,我用Pierre Clastres的社会反对国家的理论来讨论,对于美洲印第安人来说,战争不仅具有社会特征,而且本身就是社会的基础。在最后一节,我讨论了Eduardo Viveiros de Castro的潜在亲和理论,提出霍布斯的自然状态也是一种将另类作为敌意的图式化形式。最后,我要说明这如何使人们理解和平是一种不稳定的局势,是最终独立于国家的道德实践的结果。
期刊介绍:
Hobbes Studies is an international peer reviewed scholarly journal. Its interests are twofold; first, in publishing research about the philosophical, political, historical, literary, and scientific matters related to Thomas Hobbes"s own thought, at the beginning of the modern state and the rise of science, and also in a comparison of his views to other important thinkers; second, because of Hobbes"s enduring influence in stimulating social and political theory, the journal is interested in publishing such discussions. Articles and occasional book reviews are peer reviewed. The International Hobbes Association is associated with the journal but submissions are open.