SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Sam Bostaph)
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:18:23 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (22 lines)
----------------- HES POSTING ----------------- 
 
 
I think it's worth bearing in mind in any comparison of Hobbes and Hume 
that Hume had more than practical reasons for not emphasizing a debt to 
Hobbes. They were opponents on the key political-philosophical point of 
natural rights.  For Hobbes, government was a way of "granting" rights and 
protecting naturally brutish humans from each other.  For Hume, rights 
predate government and government's job is to guarantee and protect them; 
and, human nature is not so brutish, as humans are God's creatures with a 
moral nature. 
 
Buchanan et al. have a Hobbsian view of human nature.  Jim Buchanan is 
quite 
forthcoming in that regard. 
 
Sam Bostaph 
 
------------ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ------------ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask] 
 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2