/lit/ - Literature

>>7919095
Is he representing a mass of people?

Is he a country personified?

Because he wants us to associate 'rulers' with 'little people'. Hobbes believes that we are all fundamentally free human beings who should not respect their authorities in any way. In this image, he literally belittles the ruler.

>>7919112
Are you fucking retarded? That's the exact opposite of what he believed.

>>7919104
He's the king, man. He rules the underworld, guy.

>>7919095
I've seen that drawing a million times and never noticed that. I always just thought it was some strange, jagged armour. Wow.

he body too big for he gotdamn ppl

>>7919115
Christ, you argue like a true leftist. Your counter-arguments are made up of half-sentences, half-argument and half rethorical question. It can't be counter-argued because we have literally no idea what your point is. We show you facts and answer with cryptic messages with no content whatsoever. The rethorical equivalent of pringles.

>>7919095

He's symbolizing men in nature coming together and giving some of their freedom to a sovereign, for betterment of all.

>>7919135
>human beings who should not respect their authorities in any way

Hobbes believed that nature was a war of all against all, and that man should enter into society by submitting to a "Leviathan".

>>7919135
>half-, half-, and half-.
Confirmed for being retarded.

>>7919119
Does he call the shots tho?

>>7919138
/thread

>>7919112
That's actually the opposite of what Hobbes believed.

>>7919175
He makes the money, man. He rolls the nickles. The game is his. He deals the cards.

Real talk, Hobbes is GOAT tier political philosophy.

>>7919112
8/10 b8 m8

Hobbes believed that all people should bow before the monarch and serve him as a part of his body. The central metaphor of "Leviathan" was the idea that the King should not even have to use his arms and legs. When he wants to reach out and grab something, e.g. a sword or a staff, the people should amass around the sword and hold it on his behalf, out of love for him. This gives the people purpose, without which they would cease to function as a body and descend into anarchy.

>>7919135
>The rhetorical equivalent of pringles.
kek

>>7920501
source?

>>7919095
People like to think that Hobbes's theory has nothing to do with religion, but this division between the Christian subject and the civil subject is indeed a key part of the work. Let me break down this frontispiece that Hobbes commissioned from an anonymous artist.

The king is (or is wearing armor) made up of many small subjects. This shows that the sovereign's power lies in the combined strength of his subjects. He holds the church staff in one hand and the civil sword in his other hand. Above him we have Job 41:33, "Upon earth there is not his like."

But let's look at the smaller drawings. The ways of means of temporal and spiritual rule, contrasted. Castle on the left, church on the right. Who has authority? The crown on the left, the bishop's hat on the right. Then there's the force exercised--cannon (physical force) vs the lightning bolts (wrath of god). Moving down, we have the ways of waging war.--guns and the like vs. argumentation (syllogism, verbal forks) The one most important is the Temporal/Spiritual distinction, which Hobbes thinks makes men see double and be confused about who to obey. The final pair of drawings shows the battlefield of the respective sides, where victories are won. On the left, we have your typical battlefield, and on the right we see a university disputation.

If anyone has any more questions about the frontispiece, I'll try to answer them.

>>7919138
This. Hobbes believed Governments (including kings) attained their power/authority from the consent of the governed. Thus, the king is made of the ruled.

>>7920592
Bottom right corner has a watermark you faggot.