Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Spinoza's account of sovereign authority differs fundamentally from Hobbes's account, in which the sovereign is always vested with nearly absolute legislative authority.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.For Spinoza, sovereign right is conditioned on and limited by the collective power of the people.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.For Hobbes, sovereign legislative authority is nearly absolute and not contingent on the people's ongoing power to resist.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.For Spinoza, the sovereign loses its right when it fails to secure the conditions for collective self-preservation, making authority intrinsically revocable.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.For Hobbes, subjects alienate their natural right entirely to the sovereign, who retains authority even when governance is harmful, as in Leviathan Ch. 18.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.This structural asymmetry—conditional versus alienated authority—marks a fundamental, not merely gradational, difference between the two theories.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Spinoza grounds sovereign legitimacy in conatus: the state's right extends only as far as its actual power to sustain collective striving, per the Tractatus Politicus 3/2.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Hobbes grounds legitimacy in covenant: the sovereign's authority derives from a one-time act of consent that cannot be revoked by subsequent popular dissatisfaction.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Grounding authority in ongoing natural power rather than historical covenant produces a categorically distinct theory of political obligation, not merely a weaker Hobbesian one.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.