Haggling with Hobbes and Hume: A Comparison
John Parker
Thomas Hobbes and David Hume are two of the most influential ethical philosophers of all time. Both of their theories seek to derive morality and its expression from the passions. They approach the matter in astoundingly similar ways but, nevertheless, manifest a few critical differences. Hobbes seeks to ground his system in a single passion that he argues is natural as a mode of legitimizing it. At the same time, Hume is content to allow the idea of a moral sense to stand on its own merits on an individual basis and rejects further naturalistic explanations. This subtle difference in foundation gives rise to a myriad of allowances and restrictions that differ between the two men's theories. Still, I believe Hume's theory is superior because it is less susceptible to being trapped in counter-intuitive moral situations than Hobbes’s is.
John Parker is an undergraduate student at Syracuse University and a double major in Political Philosophy and Writing & Rhetoric. John is also a member of Syracuse Mock Trial as a closer and is pursuing law school.