Immanuel Kant vs. Thomas Hobbes

While Thomas Hobbes presents a rather grim perspective of human nature, his sound, supported accusations about the actions of Earth's inhabitants are far more realistic than those of his fellow writer, Immanuel Kant.

Hobbes argument is spearheaded by the notion that all men in their natural state are concerned primarily with their ascent to the top of their species; they fight to be the most powerful so as not to have to worry about anticipating attack by another, who is inevitably vying for the same ends. Man is far too arrogant to believe in anyone's prudence but his own, which provides ample explanation for the fact that he is often falsely confident about his powers to the extent that he rejects the aid/input of others. Even those who pretend to recognize the value of others' contributions only do so to appear more appreciative of the very people they despise.

Rather than find a way to share a coveted valuable, two men will sooner devise a way to destroy the other and take the valuable in its entirety. Hobbes also suggests that, while a man living in solitude might not be afflicted with a competitive drive, men in society are incapable of considering justice- only gain. Considering the general lack of humanity Hobbes is suggesting of us, it is not surprising that he believes men are only inclined to make peace upon fear of death and/or desire and opportunity for a better lifestyle.

Kant, on the other hand, trusts that all humans, at their cores, really want to get along with each other, regardless of his/her societal placement. He also suggests that we do not possess the desire to take what we want from each other, but rather that we are all so contented with our share that we leave our "neighbors" alone. Kant agrees with Hobbes in that a state of nature is actually a state of war in which hostilities could break out at any moment. However, he insists that a state of perpetual peace is what mankind actually desires, and can achieve if they just stop having all those human feelings of envy, hatred and contempt for each other. It must be easy to believe that there will be peace between states someday if you believe that "human inclination" commands it.