This Article Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 0090591709340140v1 37/5/676    most recent References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Springborg, P. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The Paradoxical Hobbes

A Critical Response to the Hobbes Symposium, Political Theory, Vol. 36, 2008

Free University of Bolzano, Italy

Attention has turned from Hobbes the systematic thinker to his inconsistencies, as the essays in the Hobbes symposium published in the recent volume of Political Theory suggest. Deborah Baumgold, in "The Difficulties of Hobbes Interpretation," shifted the focus to "the history of the book," and Hobbes’s method of serial composition and peripatetic insertion, as a major source of his inconsistency. Accepting Baumgold’s method, the author argues that the manner of composition does not necessarily determine content and that fundamental paradoxes in Hobbes’s work have a different provenance, for which there are also contextual answers. Hobbes was a courtier’s client, but one committed early to a materialist ontology and epistemology, and these commitments shackled him in treating the immediate political questions with which he was required to deal, leading to systemic paradoxes in his treatment of natural law, liberty, authorization, and consent.

Key Words: Hobbes’s paradoxes • materialist ontology • politics

This version was published on October 1, 2009

Political Theory, Vol. 37, No. 5, 676-688 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0090591709340140


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?