Every man has equal ability but… it is whether he or she applies the ability that determines its outcome of varying degrees? Hobs says if two men both want the same thing, a steak dinner for example, and only one man can have it, then the two become enemies. The next man that comes along that wants the steak dinner may kill the man who has it, and that cycle will repeat itself. I agree with that.
Hobbs identifies three aspects in man’s nature that makes man fight. Thy are competition, diffidence, and glory. To gain, to defend what is gained, and individual status held. Sounds like Hobbs is talking about war. Without government every man would be enemy to every man. It would be as if each man fought a war with each man he encountered as opposed to societal warring.
Hobbs says men who live in peace do so because they fear death. I think that is interesting but I don’t quite get it.
Right of Nature, is man’s choice to do what he wants with his life. To choose his path? How is this difference from free will? Something that takes right of nature away: Concentration Camp.
‘Law forbids men to do what is destructive to his life.’There is exists a law that states ‘You may not catch a fish by any body part except the mouth,’ but I don’t see how that affects man.
It is unclear to me what to ‘lay down a right’ means. ‘transfer a right.’ Whatever to transfer a right means…I understand that an oath is something that makes transferring a right stronger..because although transferring of a right might be held in a contract by promise….promise is weak; oath strengthens promise. Oath strengths promise by swearing to the God one fears. How that works I am unsure.