Hobbes, Berkeley, freedom, liberty, determinism, free will, mechanistic conception, Protestantism, deism, philosophical skepticism, human nature, social contract
Reader
Abstract
Extract
of 4
Abstract
Comparing the conceptions of freedom defended by Hobbes and Berkeley, highlighting their opposition and philosophical implications.
Extract
[...] The problem is as follows: in what ways are the conceptions of liberty defended by Hobbes and Berkeley in opposition? What are the foundations and stakes of this opposition? This central opposition regarding the meaning and extent of liberty will be analyzed in this dissertation. The plan will first expose the respective conceptions of Hobbes and Berkeley, before showing their opposition and highlighting the philosophical stakes. I. The conception of liberty according to Hobbes The conception of liberty according to Hobbes must be understood in the light of the historical context in which he develops his philosophy. [...]
[...] In this conception, the soul would be subject to the laws of bodily necessity and its actions determined in a mechanical manner. However, this is incompatible with freedom and moral responsibility. He therefore defends an extended conception of freedom, which he conceives as the power of the spirit over its own acts and operations, beyond simple bodily actions. According to him, 'It follows obviously from this that God is known as certainly and immediately as any other spirit or spiritual being distinct from us.' III. [...]
[...] The term "liberty" refers to the idea of independence of will and autonomy in actions. It implies the absence of external constraint on choices and actions. Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) is an English philosopher who is a proponent of "natural mechanism". George Berkeley (1685-1753) is an Irish bishop and philosopher who defends immaterialism. These two authors defend opposing conceptions of liberty. Hobbes strictly limits it to bodily actions, denying any freedom of choice and deliberation. Berkeley, on the other hand, develops an extended conception of liberty, which he considers to apply equally to the mind. [...]
[...] Concerning its meaning, Hobbes adopts a deterministic view by denying all free will. According to him, human actions are entirely determined by physical causes, man being reduced to a machine subject to the laws of motion. Berkeley rises against this mechanistic conception and defends freedom as the personal power of volition of the spirit. For him, man is endowed with a will that allows him to choose his actions freely. As for the extent of freedom, Hobbes strictly restricts it to only bodily actions. [...]
[...] This conception has the advantage of defending political order, but at the cost of a determinism pushed to the extreme, which does not do justice to human experience. Berkeley, for his part, offers a more complex vision by extending freedom to the activity of the spirit. This conception has the merit of preserving man's moral responsibility. Nevertheless, by rejecting any explanation by physical causes, it remains difficult to reconcile with the rational explanation of the world. Their opposition makes it possible to enrich philosophical reflection on freedom and its different possible meanings. [...]
