Of Man – Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes

Chapter Info (Click Here)

Book No. – 51 (Political Science)

Book Name – Leviathan (Thomas Hobbes)

What’s Inside the Chapter? (After Subscription)

1. CH1 Of Sense

2. CH2. Of Imagination

3 CH3. Of the Consequence or Train of imaginations

4. CH4 Of Speech

5. CH5. Of Reason and Science

6 CH5. Of the Intenor Beginnings of Voluntary Notions. Commonly called the Passions, and the Speeches by which They are Expressest

7. CHZ. Of the Ends or Resolutions of Discourse

8. CHB. Of the Virtues Commonty. called intellectual, and their. Contrary. Defects

9. CH9. Of the Several Subject of Knowledge

10. CH10 Of Power Worth Dignity Honsur and Worthiness

11. CH11. Of the Difference of Manners

12. CH12. Of Religion

13. CH12. Of the Natural Condition of Mankind as Concerning their Felicity and Misery

14. GH14. Of the First and Second Natural Laws, and Of Contracts

15. CH15.01.0ther Laws of Nature

16. CH16. Of Persons. Authors, and Things Personated

Note: The first chapter of every book is free.

Access this chapter with any subscription below:

Half Yearly Plan (All Subject)
Annual Plan (All Subject)
Political Science (Single Subject)
CUET PG + Political Science

LANGUAGE

Of Man

Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes

Part – I

Harshit Sharma

Alumnus (BHU)

Contact

CH1. Of Sense

Thoughts of man are first considered singly, and then in relation to one another.
Singly, thoughts are representations or appearances of qualities or accidents of bodies, called objects.
These objects act on the eyes, ears, and other parts of the body, creating diverse appearances.
The origin of these appearances is sense, as no concept exists in the mind that hasn’t been generated from the senses.
Sense is the origin of all conceptions.
The natural cause of sense is the external body or object, which presses on each sense organ.
This pressing occurs directly in senses like taste and touch, and indirectly in sight, hearing, and smell.
The pressure from external objects, via nerves and body parts, creates a counter-pressure or effort in the heart and brain.
This effort seems outward and is perceived as matter outside.
This perception, called fancy, is the sense of things.
The qualities we sense are diverse motions caused by external objects pressing our organs.
Sense qualities are seen in the eye (light/color), ear (sound), nostrils (odor), tongue/palate (taste), and skin (feelings of heat, cold, hardness, softness).
These qualities are just motions; they produce only motion, not substance.
The appearance of things, or fancy, is akin to the state of dreaming.
The actions of bodies cause us to perceive color and sound by strong, unnoticed action.
If these qualities existed in objects, they couldn’t be separated from them, but we see that appearances can change with reflection.
Objects exist in one place, but their fancy or appearance exists in another.
The real object is distinct from the image or fancy it generates.
In conclusion, sense is original fancy, caused by the pressure or motion of external things on our organs.
The philosophers of Aristotle’s schools teach an alternative view, stating that visible species or audible species come from the objects themselves.
They claim that the object seen or heard emits a visible or audible aspect, which enters the eye or ear and causes perception.
They also teach that the object understood sends forth an intelligible species, leading to understanding.
Hobbes does not dismiss the use of universities but criticizes the insignificant speech common in them.

CH2. Of Imagination

When a thing is still, it remains still unless moved; when in motion, it remains in motion unless hindered.
People often think motion will eventually seek rest, as they themselves feel tired after motion.
Philosophers wrongly claim that heavy bodies fall due to an appetite for rest, attributing this desire to inanimate objects.
When a body is in motion, it continues moving unless something hinders it, and the hindrance takes time to stop it completely.
Imagination occurs when the object is removed, and we retain an image of it, though less clear.
Imagination is the decay of sense, experienced by both sleeping and waking creatures.
The decay of sense in waking is like the obscuring of starlight by sunlight: the strongest impression dominates.
Time and distance weaken the memory of past impressions, just as distant objects appear blurry.
Imagination fades with time and distance, resulting in a weaker recollection of past events.
Memory is the name given to decaying sense, where imagination is the mental image, and memory is the fading of that image.
Experience is simply memory of many things.
Simple imagination refers to imagining the whole object as it was presented to the senses (e.g., imagining a man or a horse seen before).
Compound imagination involves combining images from different senses or times (e.g., imagining a centaur from the sight of a man and a horse).
Fiction results from the mind’s compounded imagination, such as imagining oneself as Hercules or Alexander.
Imagination can arise from intense sensory impressions, like seeing an image of the sun after staring at it.
Dreams are a type of imagination that occurs during sleep, based on prior sensory experiences.
In sleep, organs of sense are numbed, preventing new sensory impressions and making dreams clearer due to the absence of external distractions.
Dreams arise from agitation of the body’s internal parts, which maintain motion in the brain.
Distinguishing between waking thoughts and dreams is difficult because of the similarity of experiences.
The author is confident that while awake, he is not dreaming, as waking thoughts seem more coherent than dreams, which often appear absurd.
When dreaming, the person feels awake, but upon reflection, the absurdity of dreams shows the difference.
Dreams are caused by the distemper of internal parts of the body; different distempers cause different types of dreams.
Cold induces dreams of fear, and internal motions between the brain and body produce these fearful images.
Anger causes heat in certain body parts, which in turn causes anger-related dreams during sleep.
Desire causes heat in some parts of the body, which also causes dreams of kindness when too much heat is present during sleep.
Dreams are the reverse of waking thoughts; waking thoughts start at one end, while dreams begin at another.
The difficulty in distinguishing between dreams and waking thoughts is greatest when unaware that one is sleeping.
Fearful thoughts or a troubled conscience can make a person unaware of their sleep, as seen in Marcus Brutus, who mistook a dream for a vision due to the circumstances of his fear.
Superstitious people are prone to imagining spirits and ghosts, often due to strong emotions or being alone in the dark.
The confusion between dreams, visions, and sensory experiences led to the worship of mythological beings, such as satyrs, fauns, and nymphs.
The belief in witchcraft, fairies, and ghosts is often perpetuated by a lack of understanding and the desire to maintain control over others.
Some believe that witches have real power, but they are punished for believing in and trying to perform misdeedsunder this false belief.
The use of exorcism, crosses, and holy water serves to maintain belief in supernatural occurrences, such as ghosts and spirits.
Though God can make unnatural apparitions, it is not in line with Christian faith to believe these happen frequently.
Evil people may exploit the belief in supernatural occurrences for their own benefit, but rational thinking should limit belief to what is credible.
Removing superstitious fear of spirits, and eliminating false prophecies and dreams, would better prepare people for civil obedience.
Schools should challenge such superstitions, but they often perpetuate them by teaching that imagination or senseslack clear causes.
Some philosophers claim that imaginations rise without cause or from the will, attributing good thoughts to God and evil thoughts to the Devil.
Senses receive the species of things and pass them along to common sense, fancy, memory, and judgment, though this concept is often unclear.
Imagination, raised by words or other signs, is called understanding and is common to both humans and animals.
Dogs and other animals can understand their owner’s calls or reprimands by custom.
Human understanding is unique in that it involves not only the will, but also the ability to form concepts and thoughts through language and speech.

CH3. Of the Consequence or Train of Imaginations

Train of thoughts (or mental discourse) is the succession of one thought to another.
Mental discourse is distinguished from verbal discourse; it occurs without the use of words.
Thoughts follow a sequence based on prior sensory experiences; each thought is linked to previous experiences.
A thought is not completely random; it is influenced by past sensory impressions and moves coherently, like waterfollowing the motion of a finger.
In imagination, there is no certainty about what follows next, but it will always be related to something experienced previously.
Mental discourse comes in two forms:
- Unguided, inconstant thoughts that wander, often like dreams, and seem disconnected, but have some underlying coherence.
- Guided, more constant thoughts regulated by desire or design, often leading to actions.
When thoughts are guided by desire, they persist and quickly return if the mind starts to wander, directed towards a goal.
The idea of respice finem (look to the end) was recommended by one of the seven wise men to guide thoughts towards the intended goal.
There are two types of regulated thoughts:
- Seeking the causes or means of an effect, which is common to both humans and animals.
- Seeking the effects of something, imagining possible outcomes, which is unique to humans.
Curiosity, or the desire to seek what can be done with something, is a distinct quality of human thought.
Mental discourse governed by design is essentially seeking or invention (Latin: sagacitas, solertia), uncovering the causes or effects of things.
In remembrance, the mind traces back through time and place to recall lost objects or actions.
Foresight (also prudence or providence) is the act of predicting future events by analyzing past experiences, though it is inherently uncertain.
The more experience a person has, the more accurately they can predict the future; however, foresight is still a presumption rather than certainty.
Prudence involves anticipation based on past experience, but is not unique to humans, as some animals also act prudently at a young age.
Signs are events that precede and predict future events; more frequent occurrences of signs lead to less uncertainty.
The more experienced one is, the better they are at predicting future outcomes, as they have more signs to base their judgments on.
The distinction between man and beast is not based on prudence alone, as some animals show prudent behavior at a young age.
The presumption of future events (prudence) and the presumption of past events are both based on experience.
A person may predict future events based on past events they have observed, like seeing a flourishing state descend into civil war and ruin.
The mind has no inherent faculties that require only senses to exercise; other faculties are learned through study, instruction, and discipline.
Words and speech play a significant role in developing human faculties and distinguishing humans from animals.
Imagination is always finite; humans cannot conceive anything truly infinite (e.g., infinite magnitude, swiftness, time, force, or power).
The term “infinite” signifies a lack of ability to conceive limits, not the concept of something boundless.
The name of God is used not to fully conceive Him, as His greatness and power are incomprehensible, but to honorHim.
All concepts are derived from sensory perceptions, which are always finite, and anything beyond this is absurd or unintelligible.
Humans can only conceive things in space, with magnitude, and divisible into parts; contradictions such as something being in multiple places at once are nonsensical.

CH4. Of Speech

The invention of printing, although ingenious, is considered less significant than the invention of letters.
The first use of letters is uncertain, but it is said to have been introduced to Greece by Cadmus, the son of Agenor, King of Phoenicia.
Letters were a means of preserving the memory of the past and connecting dispersed human societies.
The invention of speech was the most noble and beneficial, allowing humans to register thoughts, recall them, and communicate for mutual benefit.
God is considered the first to teach Adam the names of creatures in the Biblical narrative.
Adam’s language was limited and did not include abstract terms like entity, intentionality, and other philosophical concepts.
At the Tower of Babel, languages were confused by God, causing diversity in tongues across the world.
The general purpose of speech is to transform mental discourse into verbal expressions for memory and communication.
Two main uses of speech:
1. Registering consequences of thoughts to preserve memory.
2. Using words as signs to express feelings, desires, and thoughts.
Special uses of speech:
1. Register causes and effects.
2. Teach and counsel others.
3. Express wills and purposes to help one another.
4. Delight others by using words playfully.
Four abuses of speech:
1. Inconsistent word meanings, leading to false recollections.
2. Metaphorical language, misleading others by using words out of their intended meaning.
3. False declarations of will, misleading others.
4. Verbal harm: using words to hurt unnecessarily, unless for correction.
Names can be proper (specific to one thing) or universal (applied to many things).
A universal name is based on a shared characteristic, like the name “man” for all humans.
Universal names can be larger or smaller in scope; for example, “body” includes “man,” while “man” and “rational” have the same scope.
Names can be one word or several words used together to describe a concept.
Words transform complex ideas into simpler concepts, allowing for the universal application of knowledge.
Without words, even a basic task like counting is impossible.
Numeral words were once not in use, and early humans used their fingers to count.
Without words, it is impossible to perform arithmetic, measure magnitudes, force, or speed.
In speech, when two names are joined, if the second name describes the first name fully, the affirmation is true.
Truth and falsehood are qualities of speech, not of things.
When precise truth is sought, one must remember the meanings of the names used to avoid being ensnared in false reasoning.
Definitions of terms are essential for science and avoiding errors in reasoning.
Errors in definitions lead to larger errors in reasoning and understanding.
Relying on books without critically analyzing definitions leads to false knowledge.
True science can be distinguished from false doctrines by examining definitions and reasoning critically.
Words are tools for wise individuals to track knowledge, but can mislead those who trust blindly in authority.
Names are essential for any object or concept that can be added or subtracted in an account, allowing for reckoning and measurement.
The Latin word ratio refers to both reasoning and accounting, and the word nomina means names, indicating their relationship with reasoning and reckoning.
The Greeks use the word lÒgoj for both speech and reason, emphasizing the connection between the two.
The act of reasoning is described as syllogism, the summing up of consequences in speech.
Names can represent things in different ways depending on the context, and they can be categorized into four general types.
First, names of matter or body, such as living, rational, hot, cold, etc., are used to describe the physical nature of things.
Second, abstract names are used to describe qualities or accidents of a thing, like life for living, motion for moved, heat for hot, etc.
Third, names of fancies represent subjective perceptions of the world, such as sight, color, and sound.
Fourth, names of names and names of speech describe categories of speech, like general, special, universal, syllogism, and oration.
There are also negative names, such as nothing, no man, and infinite, used to exclude incorrect or irrelevant terms in reasoning.
Other names are considered insignificant sounds, either because they are newly coined without definition or because they combine contradictory or inconsistent meanings.
An example of insignificant names is “incorporeal body” or “incorporeal substance,” which have no true meaning.
False affirmations create meaningless names; for example, “round quadrangle” or “in-poured virtue” are absurd and have no true reference.
Words are used to signify thoughts or concepts, but only when they align with the intended meaning.
Understanding occurs when a person correctly interprets the words and their connection in speech to form a valid concept.
Absurd and false affirmations cannot be understood universally, even if someone repeats them or thinks they understand them.
In discussing appetites, aversions, and passions, speech reflects how humans perceive and express their desires and feelings.
Names for things that affect us, such as those that please or displease, vary based on individual perceptions and feelings.
Because humans perceive things differently due to individual constitution and prejudices, the meanings of names can shift, leading to inconstant definitions.
In reasoning, one must be careful of words that carry not just a conceptual meaning but also the speaker’s emotions or biases.
Names of virtues and vices can be subjective, with different individuals labeling the same actions differently; e.g., one person calls wisdom what another calls fear, or cruelty what another calls justice.
Thus, such names cannot be reliable grounds for reasoning.
Metaphors and tropes in speech are also unreliable because they acknowledge their inconstancy, unlike other names that may appear more solid or absolute.

CH5. Of Reason and Science

Reason is described as the act of reckoning, involving addition and subtraction of consequences from general names.
Multiplying is seen as repeated addition, and division as repeated subtraction.
These operations apply not just to numbers but to anything that can be added or subtracted, such as lines, figures, time, and force.
Logic applies reasoning by connecting names and affirmations, while politics and law deal with the consequences of actions and duties.
Reason is a tool for reckoning and deducing from established definitions of names, whether in mathematics, geometry, or logic.
Even practiced individuals can make errors, but the true certainty comes from the method of reasoning.
As in accounts, reasoning requires starting from agreed-upon definitions, not just conclusions or assumptions.
If reasoning starts without solid definitions, conclusions can be false or absurd.
The concept of error in reasoning refers to mistaken assumptions about what has or will happen, while absurdityrefers to nonsensical statements that cannot be true.
Reasoning requires a progression from defined names to general rules and conclusions, not simply trusting others’ reasoning.
Philosophy often leads to absurd conclusions due to a lack of method, especially when not starting from proper definitions.
Absurdities in philosophy arise from:
1. Lack of method in reasoning from definitions.
2. Using names of bodies for accidents and vice versa.
3. Incorrectly attributing external accidents to our own bodies.
4. Misusing the term universal or general when referring to living creatures.
5. Confusing accidents with definitions or commands.
6. Using metaphors and rhetorical figures in logical reasoning.
7. Adopting meaningless technical terms learned by rote from schools.
Avoiding these pitfalls ensures clarity and minimizes the risk of absurdity.
Reasoning involves starting from clear principles and definitions, building systematically towards conclusions.
Science is the knowledge of consequences and connections between facts, which helps predict future occurrences based on past causes.
Sense and memory provide knowledge of past facts, while science is the ability to understand the causes and effects of things.
Proper reasoning enables the prediction of future actions by recognizing the relationship between cause and effect.
Children are not endowed with reason until they acquire the use of speech, though they are considered reasonable creatures due to the potential of reasoning in the future.
Most people can reason to a limited extent, such as in numbering, but it does not serve them well in common life, which is guided more by experience, memory, inclinations, fortune, and errors of others.
People without science or knowledge of rules do not understand the generation of knowledge, similar to how children misunderstand how siblings are born.
However, ignorance of causes and rules is better than relying on false reasoning or incorrect rules, which can lead to absurd conclusions and misguided actions.
The light of human minds comes from clear words, purified through definitions, with reason as the method, science as the path, and benefit to mankind as the goal.
Metaphors, senseless words, and ambiguous language are like ignes fatui, leading to wandering through absurdities, with the end being contention or sedition.
Prudence comes from experience, while sapience comes from science. The distinction between them is seen in the Latin terms prudentia (experience) and sapientia (science).
Prudence is like a person skilled in handling arms through experience, while sapience is like someone who knows where and how to act with the acquired science of their craft.
Those who blindly follow books or false rules, without real understanding, are compared to someone trusting the wrong master of fence, leading to failure or disgrace.
The signs of science are either certain or uncertain: certain when someone can clearly demonstrate the truth, and uncertain when events only sometimes align with the theory.
The signs of prudence are always uncertain, as experience cannot account for all possible variables.
In situations without infallible science, to abandon one’s natural judgment and rely on general statements from books is seen as foolishness or pedantry.
Those who display knowledge in public affairs often prioritize their reputation over the success of others’ actions, showing more prudence in private matters than in public decision-making.

CH6. Of the Interior Beginnings of Voluntary Notions, Commonly called the Passions; and the Speeches by which They are Expressed

Animals have two types of motions: vital motion and animal motion.
- Vital motion begins in generation and continues throughout life (e.g., blood circulation, breathing, nutrition).
- Animal motion (or voluntary motion) is controlled by the mind, such as walking, speaking, or moving limbs.
Sense is motion in the organs caused by external stimuli (e.g., what we see, hear), and fancy is the residual motion after sensory perception.
Imagination is the internal beginning of all voluntary motion, as actions depend on prior thoughts of where, what, and how to act.
Even when movements are small and imperceptible, they still exist, and endeavour is the term for the small, internal beginnings of these motions.
When endeavour moves toward something, it is called appetite or desire; when it moves away, it is called aversion.
- Appetite is commonly used for hunger or thirst, while desire is the general term.
- Aversion is used for things people seek to avoid.
Appetites are either innate (e.g., hunger, excretion) or acquired through experience.
Desire and love are similar, with desire representing the absence of the object and love representing its presence.
Aversion and hate are similarly related, with aversion representing the absence and hate the presence of the object.
People experience contempt for things they neither desire nor hate, which is the immobility of the heart in resisting certain things.
The constitution of a person’s body is constantly changing, meaning appetites and aversions do not always stay the same and can vary between individuals.
Anything that is the object of a person’s appetite or desire is considered good, while that which is the object of aversion is evil, and that which is contemptible is vile.
- These judgments are relative to the person making them, not inherent in the objects themselves.
In Latin, pulchrum and turpe are words related to good and evil, but not exact equivalents.
- Pulchrum signifies something that promises good, and turpe signifies something that promises evil.
In English, the equivalent terms to pulchrum and turpe vary based on the context (e.g., fair, beautiful, ugly, base).
Good has three types:
- Good in promise (pulchrum),
- Good in effect (jucundum, delightful),
- Good as means (utile, profitable).
Similarly, evil has three types:
- Evil in promise (turpe),
- Evil in effect (molestum, unpleasant),
- Evil as means (inutile, unprofitable).
Sense leads to motion or endeavour in the heart, which results in appetite or aversion toward the object.
Delight or pleasure is the appearance or sense of good, while displeasure or molestation is the appearance or sense of evil.
All appetite, desire, and love are accompanied by some level of delight, while all hatred and aversion are accompanied by displeasure.
Pleasures arise from two sources: from the sense of an object present (pleasures of sense), and from expectationabout the end or consequence of things (pleasures of the mind, called joy).
Displeasures also come from two sources: sense (called pain) and expectation of consequences (called grief).
Simple passions like appetite, desire, love, aversion, hate, joy, and grief have diverse names for different reasons:
- Based on the likelihood of attaining what is desired (hope, despair).
- Based on the object loved or hated.
- Based on the consideration of multiple passions together.
- Based on the alteration or succession of these passions.
Hope is appetite with the opinion of attaining.
Despair is appetite without the opinion of attaining.
Fear arises from aversion with the opinion of hurt from the object.
Courage is aversion with hope of avoiding hurt through resistance.
Anger is sudden courage.
Confidence is constant hope.
Diffidence is constant despair.
Indignation is anger for great harm done to another by injury.
Benevolence is the desire of good for another.
Covetousness is the desire of riches (a term always used with blame).
Ambition is the desire for office or precedence (used negatively).
Pusillanimity is fear or desire of things with little hindrance.
Magnanimity is the contempt of little helps or hindrances.
Magnanimity in danger is valour or fortitude.
Magnanimity with riches is liberality.
Pusillanimity in the use of riches is miserableness or parsimony.
Kindness is the love of persons for society.
Natural lust is the love of persons for sense.
Luxury is the love of persons based on rumination.
Love of one singularly with the desire to be singularly loved is love.
Jealousy is the fear of unrequited love.
Revengefulness is the desire to hurt another to make them condemn their own actions.
Curiosity is the desire to know why and how (unique to humans).
Religion is the fear of invisible power (true religion if it is genuine).
Superstition is the fear of imagined powers not based on reality.
Panic terror is fear without understanding the cause.
Admiration is joy from novelty (unique to humans).
Glorying is joy from one’s own power and ability.
- Confidence is grounded in experience of previous actions.
- Vainglory is based on flattery or imagined power.
Dejection of mind is grief from the opinion of lack of power.
Vainglory is common in youth and is often corrected by age and experience.
Laughter is caused by sudden glory.
- It may come from personal acts or from the imperfections of others.
- Laughter at others’ imperfections can indicate pusillanimity.
- Great minds help others and compare themselves to the most able.
Weeping is caused by sudden dejection from the loss of hope or support.
- More common in women and children who rely on external aids.
- Weeping for lost friends, unkindness, or halted revenge.
- Laughter and weeping are both sudden and diminish over time.
Shame is grief for the discovery of a defect and is linked to a desire for good reputation.
- In youth, it is commendable; in old age, it comes too late.
Impudence is the contempt of good reputation.
Pity is grief for another’s calamity and arises from imagining the same could happen to oneself.
- Compassion or fellow-feeling is linked to this.
- Less pity comes from those least likely to face the same calamity.
Cruelty is the contempt of others’ calamities due to security of one’s own fortune.
Emulation is grief for a competitor’s success, coupled with the effort to equal or exceed them.
Envy is grief with the desire to hinder or surpass a competitor.
Deliberation is the alternation of appetites, aversions, hopes, and fears regarding one thing, until it is either done or deemed impossible.
Deliberation ends when action is done or when the action is impossible.
Deliberation is a process of alternating appetites, aversions, hopes, and fears about the potential outcomes of an action.
The last appetite or aversion after deliberation is called the will, which is the act of willing.
Beasts also deliberate, as they experience similar appetites and aversions.
Will is defined as the final appetite in a deliberative process, not to be confused with earlier inclinations that don’t result in voluntary action.
Voluntary actions include those beginning from desires (like covetousness or ambition) or from aversions or fears of potential consequences.
Language of passions can be expressed in different forms:
- Indicative: Used for expressing passions (e.g., “I love,” “I fear”).
- Subjunctive: Used for deliberation (e.g., “If this is done, then this will follow”).
- Imperative: Used for desire and aversion (e.g., “Do this,” “Forbear that”).
- Optative: For emotions like vainglory, indignation, pity, and revenge.
- Interrogative: Used for desire to know (e.g., “What is it?” “Why so?”).
These forms of speech are voluntary signs of passions but not definitive signs of present emotions since they can be used arbitrarily.
Deliberation involves foresight of consequences and reasoning about possible outcomes.
A man deliberates best when he has the greatest and surest prospect of consequences, either through experience or reason.
Felicity is continual success in attaining desires; it is prosperity in this life, but true tranquillity of mind is impossible during life.
Praise signifies an opinion of goodness; magnifying signifies an opinion of power and greatness; macarism signifies felicity, but there is no English equivalent.

CH7. Of the Ends or Resolutions of Discourse

Discourse governed by desire for knowledge ends when knowledge is either attained or the pursuit is abandoned.
Mental discourse involves alternating thoughts about whether something will or will not happen, or has or has nothappened, leading to opinion.
Deliberation (in terms of good and evil) is mirrored in opinion when considering past and future truths.
The final appetite in deliberation is called the will, while the final opinion in seeking truth is the judgement.
Deliberation is a chain of appetites regarding good or bad, while doubt is a chain of opinions about true or false.
Discourse cannot lead to absolute knowledge of facts (past or future); it only leads to conditional knowledge (i.e., if this happens, then that will follow).
Knowledge of facts begins with sense and memory, while knowledge of consequences is conditional and based on words.
Discourse begins with definitions and connects them into general affirmations or syllogisms. The conclusion is called conditional knowledge or science.
If definitions are incorrect or not logically connected, the conclusion results in opinion, which may be absurd or nonsensical.
When multiple people share knowledge of a fact, they are conscious of it together.
Speaking against one’s conscience is considered an immoral act.
Conscience is sometimes metaphorically used for knowledge of one’s private thoughts or facts.
Some people attach the name conscience to their own opinions, even when they are irrational or absurd, to make their opinions seem unchallengeable.
If discourse starts without definitions, it is based on opinion or what is said by another person, whose trustworthinessis unquestioned.
Discourse then concerns the person rather than the thing, and the resolution is called belief or faith.
Faith is belief in a person’s virtue, while belief refers to the truth of what they say.
The phrase “I believe in” is primarily used in religious contexts, like the Christian Creed, where it signifies belief in the doctrine, not trust in the person.
People may believe in God’s word without fully understanding it, holding it as truth based on faith.
Faith and trust in a person can be based on their authority, but can also apply to their doctrines, such as in the case of Scriptures.
Belief in historical events or individuals, such as the acts of Alexander or Caesar, is based on the authority of historians, not the deceased figures themselves.
If Livy recounts a mythological tale, not believing it reflects distrust in the historian, not in God.
Belief based solely on human authority or writings is ultimately faith in men.

CH8. Of the Virtues Commonly called Intellectual; and their Contrary Defects

Virtue is valued for eminence and is based on comparison; without differences, nothing would be prized.
Intellectual virtues refer to abilities of the mind that are praised and desired by others, often referred to as good wit.
There are two types of intellectual virtues: natural and acquired.
Natural wit is acquired through experience and use, without method or instruction, and consists primarily of celerity of imagination (quick succession of thoughts) and steady direction to an end.
A slow imagination is seen as a defect of the mind, called dullness or stupidity.
Differences in the speed of thought are caused by the passions of individuals, leading them to focus on different things.
Observing similarities is associated with good fancy or imagination, while observing differences is associated with good judgment.
Judgment and discretion are virtues in conversation and business, involving the ability to discern times, places, and persons.
Fancy alone, without judgment, is not considered a virtue, but judgment and discretion are praised on their own.
A good fancy requires application of thought toward a useful end, often producing rare and pleasing similitudes and metaphors.
Without steadiness and direction, great fancy can lead to madness, characterized by digressions and distractions from the main discourse.
Lack of experience or pusillanimity can cause a person to lose focus, being distracted by new or insignificant things.
In a good poem, fancy should be more eminent, while in a history, judgment is paramount.
Fancy is predominant in orations of praise or invective, where the goal is not truth, but to honor or dishonor.
In hortations and pleadings, the judgment or fancy is used depending on the design of the discourse.
In rigorous demonstration, council, and truth-searching, judgment is most important, and metaphors are excluded as they deceive.
Any discourse lacking discretion will be seen as lacking wit, regardless of the fanciness.
Verbal discourse is limited by judgment, governing what is appropriate for the time, place, and persons.
Extravagant fancies are inappropriate outside familiar or casual settings, such as in a sermon or in public.
Discretion is what distinguishes appropriate wit from inappropriate fancy.
Judgment without fancy is wit, but fancy without judgment is not.
When thoughts in a discourse align with a design and contribute to it, the resulting wit is called prudence, relying on experience and memory.
Prudence is not about degree, but about the kind of business at hand (e.g., governing a family or a kingdom).
A plain husbandman may be more prudent in his personal affairs than a Privy Counsellor in another’s.
Adding unjust or dishonest means to prudence, such as those prompted by fear or want, leads to craft, which is a form of pusillanimity.
Magnanimity is the contempt of unjust or dishonest aids.
Versutia (translated as shifting) refers to avoiding a present danger by engaging in a greater one, like robbing one person to pay another.
Acquired wit is based on reason, which is grounded in the right use of speech and produces the sciences.
Reason and science were discussed in previous chapters (5 and 6).
The difference in wits stems from passions, which are influenced by both body constitution and education.
If differences in wit were due to the brain or sensory organs, there would be significant differences in all senses like sight and hearing, but this is not the case.
The primary causes of differences in wit are passions, which arise from both body constitution and customs/education.
The passions most responsible for differences in wit include desire for power, riches, knowledge, and honor, all of which can be reduced to desire for power.
A person without a great passion for these things, being indifferent, can be good but lacks both fancy and judgment.
Desires drive thoughts like scouts to find the way to what is desired, and the steadiness and quickness of thought depend on passion.
No desire is akin to being dead, while weak passions lead to dullness, indifferent passions lead to giddiness, and stronger passions lead to madness.
Excessive passions may stem from body constitution or be caused by the violence or long duration of a passion.
Two major passions causing madness are pride (which leads to anger and rage) and dejection (which leads to fearsand melancholy).
Pride can result in rage when accompanied by excessive desire for revenge or self-opinion.
Dejection leads to fears and melancholy, often seen in superstition or irrational fears.
Madness results from any passion that causes unusual behavior.
A person with a delusion of being divinely inspired, without extravagant action, can still be seen as mad.
Rage in the multitude is a visible sign of madness, where collective irrationality is present, even if individual passion seems mild.
A person may think they are inspired, often starting with a lucky discovery of an error held by others and admiringthemselves as divinely chosen.
Madness can also be linked to alcohol consumption, where behavior is similar to madness: raging, loving, laughing, each depending on the dominant passion.
Wine removes dissimulation and reveals the true nature of passions.
Even sober individuals may have irrational, extravagant thoughts that they would prefer kept private, revealing that unguided passions often lead to madness.
Historically, madness has been attributed to two causes: passions or demons/spirits.
Those who attributed madness to passions called such people madmen; those who believed in demonic possession called them demoniacs or energumeni.
In Italy, madmen are called pazzi or spiritati (men possessed by spirits).
In Abdera, a large audience at the tragedy of Andromeda fell into fevers due to the extreme heat, leading many to only speak in iambics with the names Perseus and Andromeda; this was considered madness caused by the passion induced by the tragedy.
In another Greek city, a madness affected young maidens, causing many to hang themselves; this was initially attributed to the devil, but a solution proposed by the magistrates (stripping the dead and letting them hang out naked) cured the madness.
The Greeks often attributed madness to the operation of various gods like the Eumenides (Furies), Ceres, and Phoebus, seeing madness as possession by these spirits or divine forces.
The Romans and Jews shared the same views on madness, calling it possession by either good or evil spirits. Prophets and demoniacs were often labeled as madmen by the Jews.
Sadducees denied the existence of spirits, leaning towards atheism, leading others to label such people as demoniacsrather than madmen.
In the case of Jesus, when he was surrounded by a crowd, some doubted he was mad, while others accused him of having Beelzebub, the prince of devils, though others believed him to be a prophet.
The Jews viewed anyone acting in an extraordinary manner as possessed by either good or evil spirits, except for the Sadducees who did not believe in spirits.
Jesus treated those who were thought to be possessed as if they were possessed, though this could also be seen as a metaphor for passion rather than literal possession by spirits.
Healing in the Scriptures, such as rebuking the winds or fever, does not imply that fevers or winds are devils.
The parable about the unclean spirit returning to a man with seven other spirits worse than himself is an analogy about a person overwhelmed by lusts after a brief attempt to quit them.
There is no Scriptural basis for interpreting demoniacs as anything but madmen.
Another form of madness is the abuse of words, where words have no meaning or significance, common in philosophy or abstruse subjects, especially in the Schoolmen.
Schoolmen often use words in ways that make them incomprehensible or obscure, such as in discussions of the Trinity, Deity, or transubstantiation.
A Schoolman might use phrases like “the first cause does not necessarily inflow anything into the second” which have no clear meaning in ordinary language, showing the absurdity in their language.
The question of transubstantiation contains absurdities, with spirits being defined as incorporeal and movable, leading to confusing and irrational statements.
The absurdities in religious and philosophical language can be seen as another form of madness.
People who engage in such absurd discourse may have lucid intervals where they stop writing or speaking nonsensically, revealing moments of clarity amid the madness.

CH9. Of the Several Subject of Knowledge

There are two kinds of knowledge: knowledge of fact and knowledge of the consequence of one affirmation to another.
Knowledge of fact is based on sense and memory and is absolute knowledge. It is required in a witness.
Knowledge of consequence is called science and is conditional, as when one knows logical connections between affirmations (e.g., if a figure is a circle, a straight line through its center will divide it into two equal parts). This type of knowledge is required in a philosopher.
History is the register of knowledge of fact, divided into two kinds:
- Natural history: The history of facts or effects of nature that don’t depend on human will, such as metals, plants, animals, and regions.
- Civil history: The history of the voluntary actions of men in commonwealths.
Science (knowledge of consequences) is registered in books of philosophy, with different types depending on the matter.
The division of science:
- Natural Philosophy: Consequences from accidents of bodies natural.
  - Philosophia Prima: Consequences from quantity and motion (the foundational principles of philosophy).
  - Mathematics: Consequences from quantity and motion determined by figure and number.
    - Geometry: Mathematics dealing with shape and space.
    - Arithmetic: Mathematics dealing with numbers.
  - Cosmography: Consequences from motion and quantity of the earth and stars.
  - Mechanics: Consequences from the motion and quantity of special kinds of bodies, such as those in engineering, architecture, and navigation.
- Physics: Consequences from qualities of bodies.
  - Meteorology: Consequences from transient qualities of bodies.
  - Astrology: Consequences from the influence of stars.
  - Sciography: Consequences from the light of the stars and motion of the sun.
  - Terrestrial bodies: Consequences from the qualities of minerals, vegetables, and animals.
    - Optics: Consequences from the qualities of vision.
    - Music: Consequences from the qualities of sound.
    - Ethics: Consequences from the passions of men.
    - Poetry: Consequences from speech, in magnifying or vilifying.
    - Rhetoric: Consequences from speech in persuading.
    - Logic: Consequences from speech in reasoning.
    - The Science of Just and Unjust: Consequences from speech in contracting.
- Politics: Consequences from accidents of politic bodies or civil philosophy.
  - Consequences from the institution of Commonwealths, the rights, and duties of the sovereign.
  - Consequences from the same to the duty and right of the subjects.

CH10. Of Power, Worth, Dignity, Honour and Worthiness

Power of a man is the present means to obtain future apparent good, either original or instrumental.
Natural power comes from faculties like extraordinary strength, form, prudence, arts, eloquence, liberality, nobility.
Instrumental power includes acquired means like riches, reputation, friends, and good luck (the secret working of God).
Nature of power is similar to fame: it increases as it proceeds or like the motion of heavy bodies, gaining speed over time.
The greatest power is when multiple powers are united in one person, as in a Commonwealth or faction.
Servants and friends are sources of power because they provide strength through unity.
Riches combined with liberality is power, as it attracts friends and servants; without liberality, it leads to envy.
Reputation of power is itself power, as it draws support from those seeking protection.
Reputation of love for one’s country (popularity) is also power for similar reasons.
Qualities that make someone beloved or feared or the reputation of those qualities are power, as they help gain assistance from many.
Good success is power because it creates a reputation of wisdom or good fortune, leading to fear or reliance.
Affability of those already in power increases power, as it gains love.
Reputation of prudence in peace or war is power because people trust prudent leaders.
Nobility is power in Commonwealths where it holds privileges, as those privileges constitute power.
Eloquence is power because it presents itself as prudence.
Form is power because it suggests good outcomes, making one more attractive to others.
Sciences are minor powers, not widely recognized unless by a few capable individuals.
Public-use arts, like fortification and war instruments, are power because they contribute to defense and victory.
Value of a man is based on his price, or what others are willing to pay for the use of his power, which depends on the needs and judgment of others.
A man’s value may be high in specific contexts, such as an able military leader in wartime or an honest judge in peacetime, but less so in the opposite situations.
Public value is determined by the Commonwealth, often expressed through offices of command, judicature, or titles.
Honoring someone means recognizing their power, such as by asking for aid or obeying them, since both indicate belief in their ability to help or hurt.
Disobeying or neglecting someone’s aid is considered dishonoring them.
Giving great gifts signifies honoring someone by acknowledging their power and seeking protection; small gifts are seen as alms, which indicate a lower need.
Promoting another’s good or flattering is a way of honoring, showing the need for someone’s protection or help.
Neglecting someone’s welfare is dishonoring.
Giving way to another in any matter signifies respect and honor, admitting their greater power.
Arrogance or taking credit is dishonoring.
Showing love or fear is a sign of valuing someone, thus honoring them.
Contempt or failing to love or fear as expected is dishonoring.
Praising or calling someone happy is a way to honor them, showing recognition of their goodness, power, and felicity.
Reviling, mocking, or pitying someone is dishonoring.
Speaking with consideration and behaving humbly in someone’s presence shows respect and honor, while rashspeech or disrespectful behavior is dishonoring.
To believe, trust, or rely on another is to honour him; it reflects an opinion of his virtue and power.
To distrust or not believe is to dishonour.
Listening to a person’s counsel or discourse is to honour them, indicating belief in their wisdom, eloquence, or wit.
Ignoring or dismissing them is to dishonour.
To do things that are traditionally seen as signs of honour (according to law or custom) is to honour.
Refusing to perform these actions is to dishonour.
Agreeing with someone’s opinion is to honour them, showing approval of their judgement and wisdom.
Dissenting is dishonour, as it implies a correction of error or folly.
Imitating someone is to honour them, showing strong approval.
Imitating one’s enemy is to dishonour.
To honour those whom another honours shows approval of their judgement.
To honour the enemies of someone is to dishonour them.
Employment in difficult actions or decisions is to honour, reflecting belief in their wisdom or power.
Denying someone such opportunities is to dishonour.
A sovereign may honour a subject by granting titles or duties, making signs of honour subject to the will of the sovereign.
In the case of the Persian kings, the public act of honouring (like parades) illustrates the sovereign’s power to dictate signs of honour.
Civil honour depends on the sovereign and is temporary; examples include titles and offices.
Honourable possessions, actions, or qualities are those that signify power.
To be honoured, loved, or feared by many is honourable; to be honoured by few or none is dishonourable.
Dominion, victory, and riches are honourable, as they represent power.
Poverty and servitude are dishonourable.
Magnanimity, liberality, hope, courage, and confidence are honourable; traits like pusillanimity and parsimony are dishonourable.
Timely resolution in decision-making shows honour, while indecision is dishonourable.
Actions that reflect experience, wisdom, or wit are honourable; actions from error or ignorance are dishonourable.
Gravity, if it reflects seriousness in purpose, is honourable, but if it’s just for show, it is dishonourable.
Conspicuousness for wealth, office, or other significant qualities is honourable, while obscurity is dishonourable.
Being descended from conspicuous parents is honourable; from obscure parentage is dishonourable.
Actions proceeding from equity, even with loss, are honourable, as they reflect magnanimity.
Actions motivated by craft or neglect of equity are dishonourable.
Covetousness of great riches or honours is honourable, as it reflects the power to obtain them.
Covetousness for small gains or preferments is dishonourable.
Whether an action is just or unjust does not change its honour if it reflects great power.
Ancient gods committing acts of rape, theft, or other unjust deeds were still honoured due to their power.
Among men, piracy or highway robbery were once honourable due to the power associated with them.
Private duels can be honourable even if unlawful, as they reflect courage and power.
Hereditary scutcheons or coats of arms are honourable when they carry privileges or power.
Titles like duke, count, marquis, and baron are honourable as signs of the sovereign‘s power and status.
Worthiness is distinct from merit or desert and reflects the ability or fitness for a particular task.
A person is worthiest for a role if they possess the qualities required to discharge the duties well, but may still be worthy without any inherent right to it.
Merit requires a right to receive something, usually based on promises or contracts.

CH11. Of the Difference of Manners

Manners refers to qualities of mankind that concern living together in peace and unity, not merely decency in behavior.
Felicity does not consist in a satisfied mind but in a continual progress of desire from one object to another.
The cause of this constant desire is that a man cannot assure the power to live well without acquiring more.
Kings, with the greatest power, work to assure their power through laws and wars, leading to new desires like fame, pleasure, and admiration.
Competition for riches, honor, and power leads to contention, enmity, and war, as one competitor’s path to success is to subdue or eliminate the other.
Desire for ease and sensual delight makes men more likely to obey a common power, as they abandon self-reliance.
Needy and ambitious men seek war and sedition to change their circumstances, as military honor is only gained through war.
Desire for knowledge and arts of peace lead men to obey a common power for protection and leisure.
Desire for praise drives men to act in ways that please those whose judgment they value, while fame after deathprovides a sense of pleasure from foresight and imagined benefits to posterity.
Receiving benefits from an equal creates a sense of obligation that can lead to counterfeit love and secret hatred, while receiving benefits from a superior fosters love because the obligation is not burdensome.
To receive benefits from an equal or inferior, as long as there is hope of requital, fosters emulation and mutual benefit.
Doing more harm than a man can or is willing to expiate leads to hate, as the doer expects either revenge or forgiveness.
Fear of oppression leads men to seek security in society, as it is the only way to secure life and liberty.
Men who distrust their own subtlety are more inclined to strike first in sedition, whereas those who are overly confident in their wisdom prefer to consult.
Vainglorious men, who think themselves gallant without sufficient reason, are inclined only to ostentation and avoid actual engagement when danger appears.
Vain, glorious men who rely on flattery or past actions often engage in rash behavior but retreat when faced with real danger or difficulty.
Men who have a strong opinion of their own wisdom in government are inclined to ambition, especially eloquent speakers who view eloquence as wisdom.
Pusillanimity causes irresolution, leading to missed opportunities, as not resolving is often overvaluing small differences.
Frugality, while a virtue in poor men, weakens their ability to accomplish actions that require collective strength.
Eloquence, coupled with flattery, makes men trust those who possess it, as it gives the appearance of wisdom and kindness.
A military reputation further strengthens the trust in men, offering protection both from danger and others.
Ignorance of causes forces men to rely on others’ advice and authority, as they lack the understanding to detect errors or nonsense.
Ignorance of words’ meaning prevents men from detecting errors and nonsense, leading them to trust what they don’t understand.
Men give different names to the same thing due to differences in their passions. For example, what one approves as an opinion may be called heresy by someone who dislikes it, though both terms refer to private thought.
It is difficult for men to distinguish between one action of many men and many actions of one multitude; for instance, the actions of all the Roman senators in killing Catiline vs. the actions of multiple senators in killing Caesar.
Ignorance of the causes and original constitution of right, equity, law, and justice leads men to follow custom and example as the rule for their actions, thinking something unjust if it has been historically punished.
Men often appeal from reason to custom and vice versa, depending on their interest, which leads to disputes over right and wrong, unlike in mathematics where there is no such conflict.
Ignorance of remote causes leads men to blame immediate causes, such as public officers when they are frustrated with payments to the government, and even blame the supreme authority when their grievances are unresolved.
Ignorance of natural causes makes men credulous, leading them to believe in impassibilities and lies, or even invent them, as they cannot detect what is impossible.
Anxiety for the future drives men to inquire into the causes of things, as understanding them allows better management of present circumstances.
Curiosity about causes compels men to trace effects back to their origins, eventually leading them to the concept of an eternal cause, which is commonly referred to as God.
It is impossible to study natural causes without being inclined to believe in an eternal God, although one cannot fully grasp His nature.
Those who do not investigate natural causes tend to create invisible powers in their imagination, fearing these powers or invoking them in distress or during anticipated success, turning their imaginations into their gods.
This fear of the invisible leads to the creation of religion, while those who worship or fear different powers are seen as practicing superstition.
Observing this, some people have chosen to nourish and form religion into laws and to invent opinions about future events to better govern others and maximize their own power.

CH12. Of Religion

The seed of religion is found only in man and consists of a peculiar quality or an eminent degree of it, which is not present in other living creatures.
Inquisitiveness into the causes of events is inherent in man; all men, to varying degrees, seek to understand the causes of their good and evil fortune.
Man tends to believe that everything with a beginning must have a cause, determining why things occur at particular times.
Unlike animals, who have no foresight, man observes the sequence of events and remembers their antecedence and consequence. When the true causes are unclear, men create their own explanations based on imagination or the authority of others.
Anxiety results from the belief that everything has a cause, causing men to worry perpetually about future events, much like the myth of Prometheus being tormented by an eagle.
Fear and ignorance of causes drive man to attribute their good or bad fortune to invisible powers or agents, leading to the creation of gods.
The belief in gods may originate from fear, but the acknowledgment of one eternal, omnipotent God can arise from the search for natural causes and their effects.
Men reason to the First Mover—an eternal cause—through philosophical inquiry, leading to the concept of God, though they cannot fully understand His nature.
The substance of invisible agents or gods is often conceived as similar to the soul of man, which appears in dreams or reflections. This leads to the belief in spirits as thin, aerial bodies.
The concept of immaterial spirits could not arise naturally, as men cannot conceive of something that is both spirit and incorporeal.
Those who acknowledge an infinite, omnipotent God choose to accept His nature as incomprehensible rather than define it in terms like spirit incorporeal, which are unintelligible.
Men, lacking understanding of causality, use past observations to guess at future events, leading them to superstitions, such as attributing luck to external factors or events.
Superstitions arise when men believe that certain actions, such as invoking gods or specific rituals, can affect their fortune, like charming or conjuring.
The worship of invisible powers involves expressions of reverence similar to those for men, including gifts, petitions, thanks, submission, and invocation.
Beyond basic acts of worship, men rely on the wisdom of others to develop further ceremonies and rituals.
When predicting future events, men rely on past events and tend to conjecture outcomes, attributing meaning to casual events and believing in prognostics from trusted sources.
The natural seed of religion consists of four elements: belief in ghosts, ignorance of causes, devotion to what is feared, and interpreting casual events as signs. These elements have led to various ceremonies across cultures, with each man’s practices being ridiculous to others.
Religion has been cultivated by two types of men: those who create it according to their own invention and those who follow God’s command.
Both groups aim to make people more apt for obedience, laws, peace, charity, and civil society.
The religion of the first group is a part of human politics, aimed at teaching subjects the duties required by earthly kings.
The religion of the second group is divine politics, offering laws for those who have submitted to the kingdom of God.
Founders of commonwealths and lawgivers of the Gentiles belong to the first group, while Abraham, Moses, and Jesus belong to the second group.
Among the Gentiles, almost everything, whether gods or devils, was attributed to the invisible powers: Chaos, heaven, ocean, fire, winds, and various animals, people, and objects were deified.
Spirits (demons) were believed to inhabit various places: Pan, Satyrs, Fauns, Nymphs, Lares, and more.
In addition to gods, accidents and qualities like time, peace, love, and health were also worshipped as divine.
The gods also included personifications of human attributes: wit (Muses), ignorance (Fortune), lust (Cupid), rage(Furies), and sex (Priapus).
The Gentile gods were often depicted with human and animal characteristics, including anger, revenge, and other passions, as well as vices like theft, adultery, and sodomy.
The Gentiles created second gods to explain natural events, attributing them to powers like Venus (fecundity), Apollo(arts), and Aeolus (storms).
These gods were often represented in images, with the intent that the common people would fear them, thinking the gods resided within their representations.
Temples, lands, and revenues were consecrated to the gods, and they were endowed with human and animal faculties, anger, lust, and other attributes.
Divination practices emerged to predict the future, based on superstition and the ignorance of causes: oracles, omens, astrology, necromancy, and witchcraft.
Superstitions like augury, haruspicy, dreams, and lotteries were believed to predict the future, often based on random or absurd events.
People were easily swayed by those who had gained credibility, using fear and ignorance to manipulate belief.
Founders of commonwealths would pretend that their laws were dictated by gods or higher beings to make the laws more easily accepted.
Examples include Numa Pompilius claiming his ceremonies were received from the nymph Egeria, and Muhammadclaiming divine guidance from the Holy Ghost.
Founders also sought to make it believed that what the gods disapproved of was forbidden by law, reinforcing the connection between divine anger and earthly laws.
Ceremonies, sacrifices, and festivals were prescribed to appease the gods and avert misfortune like wars, sicknesses, earthquakes, and personal miseries.
In ancient Rome, while some ridiculed beliefs about the afterlife, the belief in divine retribution and anger from neglecting worship was still widely held.
The primary goal of religion was to maintain the peace of the commonwealth, making the common people blame their misfortunes on neglect, error in ceremonies, or disobedience to the laws, reducing the likelihood of mutiny against their governors.
Festivals and public games were used to entertain the people, preventing discontent, murmuring, and commotion.
The Romans tolerated all religions, except those incompatible with their civil government, with the exception of the Jews, who believed they could not acknowledge subjection to any mortal king or state.
Where God planted religion through supernatural revelation, He established a peculiar kingdom and gave laws not just for behavior towards Him but towards one another.
In the kingdom of God, civil policy and religion are inseparable; thus, the distinction between temporal and spiritual domination does not apply here.
God is king of all the earth by power, but of His chosen people, He is king by covenant.
Religion begins with an opinion of a deity or invisible powers, and can be revived through the influence of reputableindividuals.
Faith in religion is founded on the belief that a leader is wise, holy, and receives divine revelation. If the leader’s wisdom, sincerity, or divine calling is doubted, the religion risks being rejected.
When contradictory beliefs are enforced, the religion loses its credibility, as contradictions are signs of ignoranceand undermine faith.
When leaders of religion act in ways that contradict their teachings, such as through injustice, cruelty, or luxury, their sincerity is questioned, weakening the faith of others.
Leaders who are suspected of having private interests (such as gaining dominions, riches, or pleasures) instead of acting for the good of others are seen as lacking love for their followers.
Divine calling is validated through the operation of miracles, true prophecy, or extraordinary felicity. Without these, new teachings lose credibility.
The faith of the children of Israel faltered when Moses was absent for forty days, leading them to worship a golden calf, demonstrating that without visible signs, faith can fail.
Similarly, when the sons of Samuel became corrupt, the people demanded a king like other nations, showing that justice failing leads to the loss of faith.
The spread of Christianity is partly attributed to the failures of the Gentile priests, whose uncleanness, avarice, and deception led people to turn to the new faith.
Christian religion in parts of Christendom (like England) was undermined due to the failings of clergy (e.g., corruption, bringing Aristotelian philosophy into doctrine).
The Church of Rome was seen as exploiting religious beliefs for the benefit of the Pope and the clergy, leading to distrust and discontent.
Examples of exploitation include the belief that kings need the Pope’s approval to rule, that kings cannot marry if they are priests, and that subjects can be freed from allegiance if the king is judged a heretic.
Papal authority and the exemption of clergy from criminal jurisdiction further fueled resentment.
The private interests of the clergy, including fees for Masses and purgatory, contributed to the decline of faith, with civil magistrates and customs sustaining religion more than the sanctity or wisdom of religious leaders.
The decline of faith and religious changes can be attributed to unpleasing priests, not only within Catholicism but also in reformist movements.

CH13. Of the Natural Condition of Mankind as Concerning their Felicity and Misery

Nature has made men equal in both body and mind, despite differences in strength and intellect.
Even the weakest person can kill the strongest through secrecy or alliances.
Prudence, or experience, is the key mental faculty, shared equally as time bestows it on everyone.
People often think they are wiser than the general public, despite acknowledging others’ talents.
Equality of ability leads to equality of hope in achieving goals.
When two people desire the same thing but cannot both have it, they become enemies.
Conflict arises for three main reasons: competition, diffidence, and glory.
- Competition causes people to invade for gain.
- Diffidence leads people to act for safety.
- Glory drives people to act for reputation.
Men will engage in violence for personal gain, defense, or over trivial insults.
Without a common power to keep them in check, men live in a state of war.
- War is not just fighting but a disposition towards conflict without security.
In a state of war, society faces severe problems:
- No industry or agriculture, as efforts are uncertain.
- No navigation, building, art, or letters.
- Life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.
People, even with existing laws and public officers, still arm themselves and lock doors to protect from others, illustrating the fear of fellow humans.
The desires and passions of humans are not sinful in themselves, but actions stemming from them are lawful only when a law forbids them.
Even in peaceful times, sovereign authorities, like kings, live in jealousy and constant suspicion, maintaining a posture of war.
In a state of war, concepts like right and wrong have no place, as there is no common power or law.
- Force and fraud become the virtues in such a condition.
- Justice and injustice are not relevant without society.
- There is no propriety or ownership; everything is gained and kept by force.
Despite this, there is the possibility of escape from such a condition through reason and passions.
The passions driving men towards peace include the fear of death, the desire for basic needs, and the hope of achieving these needs through industry.
Reason suggests laws of nature, or rules that can bring men into peaceful agreement.

CH14. Of the First and Second Natural Laws, and Of Contracts

Jus naturale is the liberty each person has to use their power for the preservation of their life.
Liberty means the absence of external impediments, allowing a person to act according to their judgment and reason.
Lex naturalis is a general rule of reason that forbids actions destructive to life or that prevent its preservation.
Right is the liberty to act or refrain from action, whereas law determines and binds actions.
In a state of nature, where there is constant conflict, every person has a right to everything, including others’ bodies, for self-preservation.
Security is absent while the right to everything exists, as this condition creates constant war.
The first fundamental law of nature is to seek peace as much as possible, and if peace cannot be achieved, the right to defend oneself by all means becomes the second law.
Mutual transfer of rights results in a contract, but this can involve simple renouncement or transfer of rights voluntarily.
A man can renounce his right by either simply giving it up or transferring it to someone else.
Injustice occurs when someone voluntarily undoes their earlier renouncement or transfer of rights.
Signs of transfer include words or actions that demonstrate the intention to renounce or transfer rights.
Contracts are based on mutual transfer of rights, either immediately or in the future, and they bind each party.
Promise in a contract is equivalent to a covenant, as it signifies the intention to transfer rights.
The contractor’s performance first is seen as meritorious and binding.
Free gifts do not constitute contracts, but when a gift is given in a competitive context, it involves merit.
The distinction between meritum congrui (merit based on conditions set by others) and meritum condigni (merit based on personal righteousness) is discussed, though debated among scholars.
A covenant made in the condition of mere nature (where every man is in a state of war against every other) is void if there is no common power to enforce it.
The fear of coercive power is necessary for enforcing the performance of covenants in the natural state.
In a civil estate (society), a covenant is valid because there is a common power to compel performance.
A covenant made under fear (such as paying a ransom or making peace due to fear of a stronger party) remains binding in the natural condition, as there are no laws to prevent it.
To make a valid covenant, both parties must mutually accept the terms; a covenant with brute beasts is impossible.
A covenant with God requires mediation by those who speak for Him, as humans do not have direct access to God’s acceptance of covenants.
A covenant involves a deliberate choice about something that is possible to perform; promises made about impossiblethings do not constitute a valid covenant.
If something becomes impossible to perform after the covenant is made, the covenant is still valid, but the person is only obligated to the value or the effort to perform.
Performance or forgiveness can release individuals from their covenants: performing is the natural end of the obligation, while forgiveness restores liberty.
Covenants entered under fear are still obligatory (e.g., a prisoner of war must fulfill his ransom or a weaker prince must keep a peace treaty).
A covenant made under duress, like being forced to redeem oneself from a thief, binds the person until civil law discharges it.
A previous covenant invalidates any subsequent promise that tries to transfer the same right.
A covenant that includes not defending oneself from force (e.g., surrendering without resistance) is void, as it contradicts the natural right to preserve one’s life.
A covenant to accuse oneself without the assurance of pardon is also invalid, as no one is required to incriminate themselves without guarantee of mercy.
Torture as a means of obtaining testimony is invalid, as the person being tortured acts to preserve their own life, not to inform the authorities.
The force of words alone is too weak to ensure covenant performance, so fear and pride are the only two reasonable forces that can hold people to their promises.
There are two objects of fear that can influence the keeping of promises: the power of spirits (religion) and the power of men (earthly authorities). The latter is more common, especially in the condition of nature where power inequality is revealed only through the event of battle.
In the state of nature, fear of invisible power (religion) is often stronger than fear of human power.
In a pre-civil state, covenants are often strengthened by an oath, where the person swears by the God they fear to ensure fulfillment.
An oath taken in any form other than the one understood by the swearer as binding is invalid. Swearing by other than God is considered impious and profaning His name.
The oath does not add to the obligation of the covenant. A covenant is binding before God even without an oath, and if the covenant is unlawful, the oath does not make it valid.

CH15. Of Other Laws of Nature

The law of nature obliges men to transfer rights that, if retained, hinder the peace of mankind, and this leads to the third law: men must perform their covenants.
Without performance of covenants, they are mere words, and the right of all men to all things remains, keeping humanity in the condition of war.
The origin of justice lies in making and performing covenants; without covenants, no right is transferred, and no action can be unjust.
Injustice is defined as the failure to perform a covenant; whatever is not unjust is just.
Covenants of mutual trust are invalid in the natural state due to the fear of non-performance; true injustice cannot exist until such fears are removed.
Before civil power is established, there is no authority to enforce covenant performance, and thus, no propriety or justice exists in the natural state.
Justice is commonly defined as giving every man his own, but without propriety (right to possessions), no injustice can exist.
In the natural state, men have a right to all things, making injustice impossible; only with the establishment of a commonwealth can covenants be valid and justice be possible.
The fool argues there is no justice, questioning whether breaking covenants for personal gain is against reason, especially when it brings no harm.
This reasoning is flawed: justice is not defined by personal benefit, but by the keeping of covenants.
Successful wickedness may be called virtue by those who justify actions, such as rebellion for gaining power, despite violating covenants.
The heathen may rationalize unjust actions (e.g., Jupiter’s rise to power) but still recognize that violating faith is unjust.
Some justify breaking faith for personal gain or power, arguing that reason dictates actions that benefit oneself.
Reasoning that leads to breaking covenants is flawed because such actions ultimately lead to self-destruction, even if temporarily advantageous.
In a condition of war, breaking covenants undermines alliances and leads to the breakdown of any society based on mutual trust.
A person who breaks a covenant is seen as untrustworthy and cannot expect safety or acceptance in any society that values peace and defense.
The person who breaks a covenant is ultimately rejected by society, leading to their destruction, as their actions contradict their preservation.
Rebellion for sovereignty, even if successful, is unreasonable because it cannot be reasonably expected to succeed and sets a dangerous precedent for future rebellion.
Justice, defined as the keeping of covenants, is a rule of reason, forbidding actions that are destructive to life, and is a law of nature.
Some argue the law of nature aims not only for preservation of life on earth but for attaining eternal felicity after death, allowing breach of covenant for personal gain or rebellion against the sovereign.
There is no natural knowledge of man’s state after death, so breach of faith cannot be considered a precept of reason or nature.
Some accept the law of nature as the keeping of faith but make exceptions for heretics or those who don’t perform their covenant to others, which is against reason.
The terms just and unjust apply differently to people and actions: when applied to people, they signify conformity or inconformity to reason; when applied to actions, they refer to the conformity or inconformity of specific actions to reason.
A just man takes care that his actions are just, while an unjust man neglects this; unjust actions may result from passion or mistake, not necessarily character.
Justice of manners refers to a noble character that avoids fraud or breach of promise; it is considered a virtue, while injustice in manners denotes a disposition to harm others.
Injustice of an action refers to injury done to a specific individual, and an injury can sometimes affect a third party (e.g., a master harmed by a servant’s failure to obey).
Actions that conform to a person’s will are not considered injuries if the person has signified their consent or release from a covenant.
Commutative justice is the justice of contracts, ensuring the equal exchange of value, while distributive justiceconcerns the fair distribution of benefits based on merit.
The value of things contracted for is determined by the appetite of the contractors, and merit, besides that owed by covenant, is rewarded by grace, not by justice.
Commutative justice involves actions like buying, selling, or exchanging, while distributive justice (or equity) involves assigning what is just according to merit.
Equity is considered a law of nature, though sometimes referred to as distributive justice, and involves ensuring fair distribution by an arbitrator.
Gratitude is the fourth law of nature, requiring that a person who receives benefit from another of mere grace ensure that the giver has no reason to regret their kindness.
Breach of gratitude is called ingratitude, which is akin to injustice, as it undermines trust, benevolence, and peace, leading to a condition of war.
The fifth law of nature is complaisance, which requires people to strive to accommodate others in society, just as stones must fit together in building.
A person who hinders society by being stubborn or refusing to accommodate others is guilty of war, violating the fundamental law of nature to seek peace.
The sixth law of nature is pardon, where a person should forgive past offenses if the offender repents and provides security for the future.
Pardon is granting peace; refusal of pardon, especially to those who show repentance, signifies an aversion to peace and violates the law of nature.
The seventh law is about revenge, where punishment should be for correction or deterrence, not for glory or retaliation, as vengeance without purpose leads to cruelty and war.
Cruelty is against the law of nature because it is done without reason and introduces unnecessary conflict.
The eighth law of nature forbids expressing hatred or contempt toward others through words, deeds, or gestures, as such actions provoke violence and conflict.
The breach of this law is called contumely, and it leads to war, which is against the law of nature.
Question of who is the better man has no place in the state of nature as all men are equal in this condition.
Inequality arises only through civil laws, not nature.
Aristotle’s idea that some men are born to rule due to wisdom and others to serve due to physical strength is flawed.
Reason and experience show that no one prefers being governed rather than governing themselves.
Even if nature has made men unequal, the acknowledgment of equality is necessary for peace and cooperation.
Pride violates the law of nature, which commands equality.
Modesty is required in peace agreements—no one should reserve rights for themselves they wouldn’t grant to others.
Equity involves treating all parties fairly, especially in judgments, to avoid civil disputes and war.
A partial judge is a cause of war as it undermines the idea of fairness and impartiality.
Distributive justice and equity demand fair sharing, even in cases of indivisible resources, through methods like lottery or first possession.
Safe conduct should be allowed for those mediating peace, as peace requires intercession.
Arbitration is crucial to resolving disputes, and parties must submit to a neutral, trusted judge for peace.
Bias in a judge leads to continued conflict, violating the law of nature.
In controversies of fact, a judge must rely on third parties for a fair resolution.
The laws of nature are for the preservation of peace and conservation of life.
Intemperance, such as drunkenness, is forbidden by the laws of nature but isn’t the focus here.
The laws of nature are summarized as: Do not do to others what you wouldn’t want done to yourself.
Laws of nature bind internally (desire for peace) but not always externally (when self-preservation is at risk).
Laws are immutable and eternal, meaning actions against peace and life, such as injustice and ingratitude, are never lawful.
Endeavoring to follow the laws of nature is key; fulfilling them makes one just.
Moral philosophy is the science of distinguishing good and evil in social interactions, and the laws of nature represent the true moral philosophy.
Virtues like justice, modesty, and mercy are good because they lead to peaceful living.
Vices such as pride and ingratitude are evil because they disrupt peace.
Moral philosophy doesn’t just focus on virtues but also the causes behind actions.
Laws of nature are ultimately commands for peace, issued by those with rightful authority (like God).

CH16. Of Persons, Authors, and Things Personated

A person is someone whose words or actions are attributed either to themselves or to another entity.
When their words or actions are considered their own, they are called a natural person.
When their words or actions represent another, they are called a feigned or artificial person.
The word person comes from the Latin persona, which means a disguise or outward appearance, often used in theatrical contexts to refer to masks or roles.
A person is similar to an actor on stage, and to personate is to act or represent oneself or another.
A person may be referred to by various titles like representative, lieutenant, vicar, attorney, etc., depending on their role in representing someone else.
Artificial persons have their words and actions owned by the author they represent.
The actor acts by authority given by the author, and their actions bind the author just as if the author did them directly.
A covenant made by an actor binds the author if the actor is acting within the scope of their authority, as per their commission.
If the authority of the actor is not known to the other party, the covenant may be invalid, unless it was understood that the actor alone had authority.
A guardian or curator can represent children, fools, and madmen, but they cannot act as authors for these individuals.
Inanimate things, like buildings, can be personated by a representative (like a rector or overseer), but they are not authors.
Idols (figments of the imagination) can be personated by representatives, but cannot be authors, as they are not real entities.
The true God can be personated, as seen in figures like Moses, Jesus Christ, and the Holy Ghost, who represent God’s will.
A multitude of men can form one person when they are represented by one individual, with consent from each person.
Unity of the representer, not the represented, makes the multitude one person.
The representative speaks and acts on behalf of the multitude, but their authority comes from the consent of the individuals they represent.
In collective decision-making, if there are more negative votes than affirmative votes, the negative votes are considered the voice of the representative.
In cases of equal votes, where votes are tied, the decision may be to abstain or defer.
Odd-numbered representatives are more likely to avoid deadlock, but they can still become mute or ineffective, especially in difficult decisions.
There are two types of authors:
1. The simple author who fully owns the actions of another.
2. The conditional author (e.g., sureties, sponsors) who agrees to take responsibility if the other does not act.
Conditional authors include roles like fidejussores, sponsores, praedes, and vades (for debt or appearance before a judge).