A lth o u g h In h is w r it in g s CDe C ive In clu d e d ) Hobbes o fte n rem arks th a t people a re d if f e r e n t fro m one a n o th e r and th a t “ th e same man, In d iv e rs tim e s, d i f f e r s fro m h im s e lfe " (19), in f a c t in De Cive he p o r tr a y s o n ly one man, and o f t h a t man he d e s c rib e s o n ly one fe a tu re — h is d e s ire o f dom inion o v e r o th e rs , h is in c lin a tio n t o d e rid e , provoke, sco rn o th e rs “ e it h e r by deeds, o r words, countenance, o r la u g h te r", h is tendency t o seek o th e rs o n ly f o r h is p r o f i t o r va in g lo ry , h is p ro p e n s ity t o h u r t th e abse n t (20).
One can o f f e r tw o com plem entary e x p la n a tio n s f o r th e lack o f emphasis on more a g re e a b le human t r a i t s such as love, c h a r ity , g e n e ro s ity , e tc . th a t c h a ra c te riz e s De C ive (even t o a la rg e r e x te n t th a n E lem ents o f Law and Le via th a n ).
On th e one hand. I t s h o u ld be re c a lle d t h a t De Cive was f o r Hobbes th e w ork in w hich he in te n d e d to fo u n d p o l i t i c a l scie n ce and th a t a re q u ire m e n t o f reason (and s c ie n c e ) is f o r Hobbes to proceed d ir e c t ly fro m prem ises to consequences, w ith o u t “ goCing] a s tra y " :
i f th e r e fo r e he reason r i g h t ( th a t is to say, b e g in n in g fro m most
(19) L eviath an , p. 146 and pp. 2 8 -9 ; De Cive, p. 74 and p. 177.
(20) Here is a s e le c tio n o f u n f la t t e r in g rem arks on human n a tu re made by Hobbes in De Cive: “ we doe n o t by n a tu re seek S o c ie ty f o r i t s own sake, b u t t h a t we may re c e iv e some Honour o r P r o f i t fro m i t ; th e s e we d e s ire P rim a rily , t h a t S e c o n d a rily "; when men meet “ f o r P le asu re , and R e c re a tio n o f mind, e v e ry man is wont to please h im s e lf m ost w ith th o se th in g s w hich s t i r r e up la u g h te r, whence he may «. by com parison o f a n o th e r mans D e fe cts and I n f ir m it ie s , passe th e more c u rre n t in h is owne o p in io n «. b u t f o r th e m ost p a r t, in th e se k in d o f m eetings, we wound th e absent .« h is reason was n o t i l l , who was wont alwayes a t p a r tin g t o goe o u t la s t" . “ I t is m a n ife s t [men] a re n o t so much d e lig h te d w ith th e S o c ie ty , as t h e ir own V ain g lo r y " ; De Cive, pp. 4 2 -3 .
e v id e n t p r in c ip le s , he makes a d is c o u rs e o u t o f consequences c o n tin u a lly n e ce ssa ry) he w i l l proceede In a m ost d ir e c t way; o th e rw is e h e e 'l goe a s tra y , t h a t Is to say, he w i l l e it h e r doe, say, o r endeavour somewhat a g a in s t h is proper end (21)
As q u a lit ie s such as g e n e ro s ity , m agnanim ity, lo y a lty , c h a r ity , e tc . cannot e x p la in why men, u n lik e bees and a n ts , a re u n a b le t o liv e In peace w ith o u t th e sword, th e y a re o f scarce In te r e s t t o a p o l i t i c a l t h e o r is t .
The same ‘s c ie n t i f i c * re q u ire m e n t o f economy c a lls f o r an assum ption o f n o n -g e ne ra I Ized g lo ry -s e e k in g beh a vio ur, s in c e (as w i l l be argued In p a r t 111 o f th e d is s e r t a t io n ) f o r Hobbes's argum ent to s tan d , I t s u f f ic e s t h a t an u n id e n tifia b le m in o r ity o f people be g lo ry -s e e k e rs . Indeed, In th e P reface to th e Reader Hobbes shows h im s e lf aware t h a t h is th e o ry h o ld s even I f g lo ry -s e e k e rs were o n ly a m in o r ity :
f o r though th e w icked w ere fe w e r then th e rig h te o u s , y e t because we cannot d is t in g u is h them, th e re Is a n e c e s s ity o f s u s p e c tin g , heeding, a n tic ip a tin g , s u b ju g a tin g , s e lf-d e fe n d in g , e v e r In c id e n t to th e most honest, and f a i r e s t c o n d itio n 'd (22)
and In v a rio u s pla ces o f De Clve he m entions, as In E lem ents o f Law and L e via th a n , th e e x is te n c e o f n o n -g lo ry -s e e k e rs .
A l l men In th e S ta te o f n a tu re have a d e s ire , and w i l l to h u r t, b u t n o t p roceeding fro m th e same cause, n e ith e r e q u a lly t o be condemn'd - t h i s man's w i l l to h u r t a r ls e th from V ain g lo r y _ th e o th e r's fro m th e n e c e s s ity o f d e fe n d in g h im s e lfe , h is lib e r t y , and h is g oo d s(23)
(21) I b id , p. 177. (22) Ib id ., p. 33. (23) I b id , p. 46.
On th e o th e r hand, one cannot f a l l t o n o tic e t h a t th e whole De Cive Is perm eated by th e vie w th a t s e lf-c o n c e rn and overw helm ing a m b itio n a re a u n iv e rs a l t r a i t o f man. T h is b e lie f can o n ly be accounted f o r as a s ig n o f Hobbes's own dise nch a ntm e n t w ith mankind and n o t as a s c i e n t i f i c re q u ire m e n t o f h is th e o ry .