{"title":"Human Nature","authors":"L. Johnson","doi":"10.7591/cornell/9781501747809.003.0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7591/cornell/9781501747809.003.0001","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter discusses Thucydides' and Hobbes's ideas of human nature, which are often said to be very similar. International relations theorists are just as much prone to this mistake as others, referring to Thucydides, as they do to Hobbes, as a “realist.” Hobbes's view is close to the view of the famous “Athenian thesis” repeated throughout Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War. That thesis is similar in many ways to the realist thesis, claiming that human beings are universally selfish and always motivated by fear, honor, and interest. Since they are compelled by their passions, they are not to be blamed for their actions, and, as Thucydides' character Diodotus points out, they can be controlled only through superior power and brute force. However, the chapter argues that, in contradiction to the Athenian thesis, Thucydides' overall treatment of human nature proves that it is not so uniform and that passions do not force people to act. Individuals are responsible for their actions, capable of reason, and therefore guilty when they allow their passions to overcome their good sense. In Thucydides' view, political problems cannot be permanently solved, because there are elements in human nature that cannot be manipulated. While Thucydides depicts the bloodthirsty violence of civil war as well as genocidal international warfare as products of the extreme pressures of war, Hobbes sees them as events that take place whenever there is no power strong enough to prevent them.","PeriodicalId":346328,"journal":{"name":"Thucydides, Hobbes, and the Interpretations of Realism","volume":"116 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116645868","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Justice","authors":"L. Johnson","doi":"10.7591/cornell/9781501747809.003.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7591/cornell/9781501747809.003.0002","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the difference between Thucydides and Hobbes on the issue of justice. The difference between what should be and what is reverberates in Thucydides' moral dramas. All the characters recognize the tension between justice and the demands of power politics. Thucydides equates justice with the avoidance of needless and excessive bloodshed and with adherence to basic war conventions, such as not killing women and children. In his treatment of Plataea, Thucydides recognizes the value of traditional notions of virtue and justice. However, he laments that men are always willing to violate these principles because of envy and need for revenge. Indeed, Thucydides holds out little hope that mankind will at any time recognize the Melian claim that its interests lie in adherence to a common code of justice. Hobbes thinks that a common code of justice is in the common interest of mankind but that the only way it can be consistently upheld is if there is an absolute sovereign to maintain it. This means that at the international level, one cannot expect all laws of nature to be observed consistently. States need only obey these laws if their unilateral obedience will cause them no harm. In this way, Hobbes makes justice and expediency coincide.","PeriodicalId":346328,"journal":{"name":"Thucydides, Hobbes, and the Interpretations of Realism","volume":"82 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134021481","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Conclusion","authors":"L. Johnson","doi":"10.7591/cornell/9781501747809.003.0004","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7591/cornell/9781501747809.003.0004","url":null,"abstract":"This concluding chapter argues that Thucydides' approach to politics is more preferable than Hobbes's. Hobbes, despite his pessimistic assumptions about human nature, is not realistic. Is it realistic to assume that all people act predictably, that they are always guided strictly by self-interest, that all other motivations are a sham—or, if genuine, so rare that to take them into account is useless? According to Thucydides, human beings are multifaceted, so that it becomes necessary, for example, to examine individual leaders and to listen seriously to their reasons for acting a certain way. Thucydides also shows that there is a natural sociability in people that goes beyond vying for power and glory and, indeed, coexists with these urges, so that it is unrealistic not to take into account a certain amount of genuine altruism. Does Hobbes's account of leadership deal with the impact of great individuals on history? Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War contains individuals with varying motivations, some altruistic, some self-interested, some acting on rage and revenge. In other words, it reflects reality. As such, Thucydides, as often as Hobbes, has been dubbed the father of international realism. The chapter then discusses how realism and neorealism, despite their differences, share the same philosophical roots. It also suggests that Thucydides has been misunderstood and that he actually provides an interesting alternative approach to realism in the study of international politics.","PeriodicalId":346328,"journal":{"name":"Thucydides, Hobbes, and the Interpretations of Realism","volume":"56 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2020-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132247108","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}