Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-m8qmq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T15:57:16.760Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Language and Its Abuses in Hobbes' Political Philosophy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

Frederick G. Whelan
Frederick G. Whelan*
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

As in Hobbes' view it is principally the capacity for speech that distinguishes men from even the social animals, so it is in verbal and doctrinal controversies that he usually finds the sources of conflict and sedition. Hobbes analyzes—in the hope of doing away with them—a variety of what he regards as abuses of language, such as metaphor, equivocation, eloquence, and absurdity, which are especially productive of political disorder. He also offers models and, in his own political philosophy, examples of the proper uses of language as science and counsel, which he believes are necessary to the establishment and governance of well-ordered commonwealths in the modern world, characterized as it is by widespread learning and disputatious habits. In the pursuance of his project, however, Hobbes himself is paradoxically forced to resort to the eloquence which he otherwise condemns, and his own observations on language provide grounds for doubts about the success of his enterprise.

Type
Research Article
Information
American Political Science Review , Volume 75 , Issue 1 , March 1981 , pp. 59 - 75
Copyright
Copyright © American Political Science Association 1981 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bell, David R. (1969). “What Hobbes Does with Words.” Philosophical Quarterly 19: 155–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Danford, John W. (1980). “The Problem of Language in Hobbes's Political Science.” Journal of Politics 42: 102–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gauthier, David (1969). The Logic of Leviathan. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, M. M. (1966). Hobbes's Science of Politics. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. Behemoth: The History of the Causes of the Civil Wars of England. In English Works, Vol. 6.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. (1972). De Cive. In Gert, Bernard (ed.), Man and Citizen. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. De Corpore. In English Works, Vol. 1.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas.(1972). De Homine. Translated by Wood, Charles T., Scott-Craig, T. S. K., and Gert, Bernard. In Gert, Bernard (ed.), Man and Citizen. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. A Dialogue between a Philosopher and a Student of the Common Laws of England. In English Works, Vol. 6.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. (1928). The Elements of Law. Edited by Tönnies, Ferdinand. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. (1839). The English Works of Thomas Hobbes. Edited by SirMolesworth, William. London: Bohn.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. (1960). Leviathan. Edited by Oakeshott, Michael. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hobbes, Thomas. “Of the Life and History of Thucydides.” In English Works, Vol. 8. (Cited as “Thucydides.”)Google Scholar
Krook, Dorothea (1956). “Thomas Hobbes's Doctrine of Meaning and Truth.” Philosophy 31: 3–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macpherson, C. B. (1962). The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Mansfield, Harvey C. Jr., (1971). “Hobbes and the Science of Indirect Government.” American Political Science Review 65: 97–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McNeilly, F. S. (1968). The Anatomy of Leviathan. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Oakeshott, Michael (1975). Hobbes on Civil Association. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Parry, Geraint (1967). “Performative Utterances and Obligation in Hobbes.” Philosophical Quarterly 17: 246–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, Richard (1967). Hobbes. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin.Google Scholar
Strauss, Leo (1952). The Political Philosophy of Hobbes. Translated by Sinclair, Elsa M.. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Strauss, Leo (1953). Natural Right and History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Thomas, Keith (1965). “The Social Origins of Hobbes's Political Thought.” In Brown, K. C. (ed.), Hobbes Studies. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Watkins, J. W. N. (1965). “Philosophy and Politics in Hobbes.” In Brown, K.. C. (ed.), Hobbes Studies. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Watkins, J. W. N. (1968). Hobbes's System of Ideas. New York: Barnes and Noble.Google Scholar
Weinberger, J. (1975). “Hobbes's Doctrine of Method.” American Political Science Review 69: 1336–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolin, Sheldon S. (1961). Politics and Vision. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Wolin, Sheldon S. (1970). Hobbes and the Epic Tradition of Political Theory. Los Angeles: William Andrews Clark Memorial Library.Google Scholar