Hobbes's Two Accounts of Law and the Structure of Reasons for Political Obedience

VENEZIA, LUCIANO

Lovaina

Seminario; RIPPLE Plenary Session; 2012

Centre for Ethics, Social and Political Philosophy, Catholic University of Leuven

Thomas Hobbes?s political theory contains a set of conceptual theses regarding law, including an analysis of the way the law affects practical reasoning. However, Hobbes?s account of law and the structure of reasons for political obedience is extremely ambiguous. In this paper, I will show that Hobbes develops not one but two different accounts: the ?carrot-and-stick? account and the ?stratified? account. Also, I will argue that the two theories are in tension, something that Hobbes himself seems to recognize to some extent. According to each account, subjects have reasons to comply with the law of a fundamentally different kind which can introduce incompatible requirements. On the carrot-and-stick account, subjects have narrow self-interested reasons to obey; on the stratified account, they have authoritative reasons so to act. Although political obedience can be overdetermined by prudential and authoritative reasons, prudential and authoritative reasons may also give subjects contrary directives.