 Hobbes’s Axioms: Hobbes's philosophical framework is built on several key axioms regarding human nature and the

state of nature. He asserts that humans are fundamentally driven by self-interest and psychological egoism, where
appetites and passions are the primary motivators for their actions. While this egoistic nature can lead to conflict and
violence, Hobbes also recognizes the role of reason in guiding individuals toward cooperation and peace. He identifies
three primary causes of conflict: competition, diffidence (fear or mistrust), and glory (the desire for reputation), all of
which can result in violence as individuals pursue personal gain, safety, or honor. Additionally, Hobbes underscores
the fundamental equality of all humans, arguing that differences in abilities do not justify one person claiming more
benefits than another. In the state of nature, where resources are scarce, competition for limited resources often
leads to disputes and violence.
 The state of nature: The state of nature, according to Hobbes, represents a theoretical concept characterized by the
absence of a common regulating authority. In this state, life is described as "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short."
Traditional notions of justice, property, and ownership lose significance, and force becomes the determinant of
outcomes. Individuals possess the right of nature, granting them the liberty to use power for self-preservation. The
laws of nature, derived from reason, aim to prevent destructive actions, and emphasize the primary law of seeking
peace. In this state, everyone has mutual rights, including over the bodies of others, resulting in constant conflict and
insecurity, with individuals having the right to defend themselves and use any means for self-preservation. These
concepts underlie Hobbes's analysis of human behavior in the absence of a common authority.
 How the transition to a civil society is achieved: Hobbes discusses three central points: first, he outlines a transition
to civil society through a covenant where individuals willingly surrender their absolute freedom for the benefits of
peace, emphasizing the need for a sovereign authority to ensure stability and enforce agreements. Second, he
distinguishes between natural laws derived from reason and promoting cooperation and positive laws created by
human societies, which lose significance in the absence of a sovereign authority. Lastly, Hobbes extends the idea of a
state of nature to nations, arguing that in the international arena, without a central authority to enforce agreements
and maintain peace, nations exist in a state of nature, proposing the establishment of sovereign authority at the
national level for peace and security in domestic and international relations.
 Criticism of Hobbes’s political philosophy: Critics of Hobbes's political philosophy raise several key concerns. First,
they challenge the extent of sovereign power in Hobbes's framework, advocating for limitations on this authority and
favoring a system of checks and balances, in contrast to Hobbes's absolute sovereign power. Second, they dispute
Hobbes's concept of psychological egoism, arguing that it oversimplifies human behavior by neglecting altruism and
empathy. Third, they question his assumption that human society solely arises out of fear of the state of nature,
asserting that humans have an inherent capacity for social interaction and cooperation. Lastly, they see Hobbes's
philosophy prompts debates about the nature of moral obligation, as it emphasizes prudence and self-interest over
broader principles of moral duty and universal ethics, sparking discussions about prudential ethics versus
deontological ethics.