Phenomena of freedom and justice in the interpretations of T. Hobbes and J. Locke

Yevgen Borinshtein; Oleksandr Stovpets; Olga Kukshinova; Anton Kisse; Natalia Kucherenko

doi:10.34069/AI/2021.42.06.24

Yevgen Borinshtein The state institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K.D. Ushynsky”, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0323-4457
Oleksandr Stovpets Odessa National Maritime University, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8001-4223
Olga Kukshinova Odessa National Maritime University, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0470-6863
Anton Kisse The state institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K.D. Ushynsky”, the People's deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7875-4617
Natalia Kucherenko Odessa National Maritime University, Ukraine. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5130-8238

DOI: https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2021.42.06.24

Keywords: freedom, justice, social contract, state, Hobbes, Locke.

Abstract

This study gives a possible representation of T. Hobbes and J. Locke's visions of the essence of 'freedom' and 'justice' phenomena. The philosophic-historical analysis performed in the article made it possible to reveal the fundamental ideological conflict between statism and liberalism, between the utilitarian, entirely pragmatic understanding the nature of the social contract (in Hobbes's political philosophy), and moral-ethical accents on the essential foundations of a state-organized society (in Locke's political thoughts). Hobbes generally ignores the moral and ethical preconditions inherent to human nature, reducing the social contract ontology to purely utilitarian aspects. The freedom of the individual loses its absolute character, as each member of this socio-political community gives up a part of his freedom in favor of 'Leviathan' (i.e. the sovereign, the state). Beginning from this moment it is fair for each individual to comply with the terms of that universally binding social contract, and its violation by someone within the community deemed to be unjust. On the contrary, Locke forms an idea of the ethical basis of the human community. Locke's political anthropology is based on the close relationship between the principle of justice and the imperatives of reason. The latter ones approach the universal ethical and legal requirements to ensure equal opportunities in the implementation and protection of freedoms and interests of the individual living in society. Under such conditions, justice means that a person acquires the maximum opportunities to fulfill his own freedoms (in all its diversity), without violating the freedoms of others.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Yevgen Borinshtein, The state institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K.D. Ushynsky”, Ukraine.

Doctor Hab. in Philosophical Sciences, Professor, head of the department of Philosophy, Sociology and Management of sociocultural activities, The state institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K.D. Ushynsky”, Ukraine.

Oleksandr Stovpets, Odessa National Maritime University, Ukraine.

Doctor Hab. in Philosophical Sciences, Professor of the Criminal and Administrative Law department, & Philosophy department, Odessa National Maritime University, Ukraine.

Olga Kukshinova, Odessa National Maritime University, Ukraine.

PhD in Legal Sciences, Associate professor, head of the Criminal and Administrative Law department, Odessa National Maritime University, Ukraine.

Anton Kisse, The state institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K.D. Ushynsky”, the People's deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

Doctor Hab. in Political Science, professor of the department of Philosophy, Sociology and Management of sociocultural activities, The state institution “South Ukrainian National Pedagogical University named after K.D. Ushynsky”, the People's deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.

Natalia Kucherenko, Odessa National Maritime University, Ukraine.

PhD scholar, teacher, Philosophy dept., Odessa National Maritime University, Ukraine.

References

Anstey, P.R. (2013). The Oxford handbook of British philosophy in the seventeenth century. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Apeldoorn, L. (2020). On the person and office of the sovereign in Hobbes’ Leviathan. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 28(1), 49-68. https://doi.org/10.1080/09608788.2019.1613632

Aristotle. (1983). Works: in four volumes. Vol. 4. Translated and edited by A.I. Dovatur. Moscow: Mysl.

Bruner, J.P. (2020). Locke, Nozick and the state of nature. Philosophical Studies, 177, 705-726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-018-1201-9

Connolly, P.J. (2019). Locke's Theory of Demonstration and Demonstrative Morality. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 98(2), 435-451. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12512

Davis, M. (2012). Locke on Consent: The 'Two Treatises' as Practical Ethics. The Philosophical Quarterly, 62(248), 464-485. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9213.2012.00045.x

Day, J.P. (1966). Locke on Property. The Philosophical Quarterly, 16(64), 207-220. https://doi.org/10.2307/2218464

Fleming, S. (2020). A Political Theory of Treaty Repudiation. The Journal of Political Philosophy, 28(1), 3-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopp.12195

Filmer, R. (2017). Patriarcha, or the Natural Power of King; and Other Political Works. Ed. by P. Laslett. London: Taylor and Francis.

Hardin, R. (1993). From Power to Order, From Hobbes to Hume. Journal of Political Philosophy, 1(1), 69-81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.1993.tb00004.x

Harrison, R. (2003). Hobbes, Locke, and confusion's masterpiece. An Examination of Seventeenth-Century Political Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hobbes, T. (1991). Works: in two volumes. Vol. 1, 1989. Vol. 2, 1991. Moscow: Mysl.

Hobbes, T. (2010). Leviathan: Or the Matter, Forme, and Power of a Common-Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civill. Ed. by Ian Shapiro. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Hoye, M.J. (2019). Natural Justice, Law, and Virtue in Hobbes’s Leviathan. Hobbes Studies, 32(2), 179-208. https://doi.org/10.1163/18750257-03202004

Kraus, J.S. (1993). The Limits of Hobbesian Contractarianism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Laslett, P. (1956). The English Revolution and Locke's "Two Treatises of Government". Cambridge Historical Journal, 12(1), 40-55. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1474691300000329

Laslett, P. (2003). Introduction to Locke's Two Treatises of Government. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Locke, J. (1836). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. London: T. Tegg and Son.

Locke, J. (1988). Works: in three volumes. Vol. 3. Moscow: Mysl.

Locke, J. (2002). Essays on the Law of Nature. Locke J. Political Essays. Ed. by M. Goldie. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Locke, J. (2003). Two Treatises of Government. Ed. by P. Laslett. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Miller, D. (2011). Property and Territory: Locke, Kant, and Steiner. Journal of Political Philosophy, 19(1), 90-109. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9760.2010.00377.x

Moehler, M. (2019). Diversity, stability, and social contract theory. Philosophical Studies, 176, 3285–3301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-018-1174-8

Nussbaum, M.C. (2006). Frontiers of Justice. Disability, Nationality, Species Membership. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Olsthoorn, J. (2013). Hobbes's Account of Distributive Justice as Equity. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 21(1), 13-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/09608788.2012.689749

Platón. (1962). The Statesman. Republic. Laws. Transl. and ed. by W.R.M. Lamb, H.N. Fowler. London: William Heinemann, 449 pages.

Rawls, J. (1999). Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Seagrave, A.S. (2015). Locke on the Law of Nature and Natural Rights. Chapter 19 in "A Companion to Locke" by Matthew Stuart. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 584 pages. P. 371-393. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118328705.ch19

Skinner, Q. (1999). Hobbes and the Purely Artificial Person of the State. Journal of Political Philosophy, 7(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9760.00063

Springborg, P. (2016). Hobbes’s materialism and Epicurean mechanism. British Journal for the History of Philosophy, 24(5), 814-835. https://doi.org/10.1080/09608788.2016.1212699

Svyrydenko, D., & Stovpets, O. (2020). Chinese Perspectives in the “Space Race” through the Prism of Global Scientific and Technological Leadership. Philosophy and Cosmology, 25, pp. 57-68. https://doi.org/10.29202/phil-cosm/25/5

Stovpets, O. (2019). Chinese legal-philosophic syncretism and its influence to value orientations of the Chinese society. Skhid, 1(159), pp. 55-60. https://doi.org/10.21847/1728-9343.2019.1(159).157856

Stovpets, O. (2020). Sinitic civilization's worldview features and their system-forming role in the complex of social relations in modern China. Interdisciplinary Studies of Complex Systems, 17, pp. 59-72. https://doi.org/10.31392/iscs.2020.17.059