Most of Hobbes' conclusions are merely assertions, such as his explanations of what is and is not injustice regarding an individuals acts toward the state. It is ambiguous why certain rights are forfeited to the state while others are not through the social covenant. Why has Hobbes judged some of these rights as forfeited and others not?
Today, there is a big push in this country to limit individual freedom/liberty for the good of society. People fear crime and the diminishing of what is called family values. The problem is whose speech should be limited? Atheists may argue that all religious speech should be censored because it is false. Theologians may argue that atheism should be censored because it is false. Family values differ from family to family. The moral values taught to Islamic, Jewish, Christian and Catholic children are not identical. Who is to decide which set of values we should follow? The individual (or the individual's parents) has to make that decision themselves without interference from well intentioned others. No one has the right to interfere with a person's individual Liberty to choose what is best for them.
Plato in seeking the truth, figured a military coup would never succeed in over throwing the government that killed his teacher, and tried to silence his teacher's teachings. The best way to implement...
Favorites
Del.icio.us
Digg
Furl
Magnolia
StumbleUpon
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
BlinkList