Forgot Username? About MyAccess If your institution subscribes to this resource, and you don't have a MyAccess Profile, please contact your library's reference desk for information on how to gain access to this resource from off-campus. Sign in via OpenAthens.
Sign in via Shibboleth. AccessBiomedical Science. AccessEmergency Medicine. Case Files Collection. Clinical Sports Medicine Collection. Davis AT Collection. Davis PT Collection. Murtagh Collection. About Search. Enable Autosuggest. Previous Chapter. Next Chapter. Velji A, Bryant J. Velji, Anvar, and John H. Chapter Global Health Ethics. Markle W. William H. Markle, et al. Accessed November 26, Download citation file: RIS Zotero. Reference Manager. In certain medieval and early modern treatises, but especially in those from early modern England, one could notice the use of medical principles and terminology in order to explain the difficulties one state might face and how to solve them.
A shift from the general medical outlook started to occur from the sixteenth century, shift which gained momentum in the seventeenth century, accompanied by a change in the outlook regarding the human body. The changes in the medical paradigm of Western Europe and in the outlook of the corporal imaginary had an effect on the way the corporal metaphor manifests itself in the mid-seventeenth century.
Thomas Hobbes lived during a time when England underwent radical political and religious transformations and, consequently, both his career and his works bear the mark of those changes. Also during this period, Hobbes devoted significant time to the study of physics and the motion of human body, which had a great influence on his concept of body politic depicted later in Leviathan , as it moved away from the typology of his forerunners within the doctrinal trend of the body politic. Hobbes returned to England in , but the political struggles which were taking place in his country during that period forced him to seek refuge again on the European continent.
In Paris, Hobbes wrote and published Leviathan, or the Matter, Forme and Power of a Common Wealth, Ecclesiastical and Civil , after which he returns to England, where he submits to the new regime and he is allowed to retire to private life. For seeing life is but a motion of limbs, the beginning whereof is in some principall part within, why may we not say that all automata engines that move themselves by springs and wheeles as doth a watch have an artificiall life? For what is the heart, but a spring; and the nerves, but so many strings; and the joynts, but so many wheeles, giving motion to the whole body, such as was intended by the Artificer?
Art goes yet further, imitating that rationall and most excellent worke of Nature, man. Hobbes follows thus the model of paradigm transformation which occurred during the seventeenth century and which consisted in the abandonment of the old outlook of the man as a microcosm mirroring on a lesser scale the universal macrocosm. A machine is no longer a natural given, an immutable order of nature which has to be preserved in order to avoid the fatal consequences of breaching it: the result was that the order existing within this body politic was no longer an immanent characteristic of that body, but was dictated exclusively by reason.
Thus, Hobbes will constantly stress the artificiality of the state. According to J. If the corporal template proposed by Hobbes brings about a significant innovation by this shift from the model of the microcosm to a mechanical model, in other regards he falls in line with the tendencies expressed by his predecessors.
First and foremost, it is about the extremely important role granted to the soul within the body politic. According to the typical corporal template, the soul is the element which grants life, but, for Hobbes, this notion also has a tangible result, the motion: existence, for Thomas Hobbes, is first and foremost a movement.
From Natural Rights to Human Rights—And Beyond
The macrocosm is a natural datum , a divine creation, whose order is dictated by the divinity; the human body was in turn a microcosm, thus a natural element, and this quality implicitly reflects, by analogy, upon the body politic and its composing parts.
In the end, it was not meaningless that the medieval and early modern political theorists depicted any attack against the body politic as an attempt against the natural order. By imagining the body politic as a mechanical creation, though, its soul is no longer a natural element, but it is explicitly proclaimed as being artificial. The distinction is important, because not just the monarch can possess sovereignty. This feature can be found in other types of governments, which Hobbes, even though he considers them less appropriate than the monarchy Hobbes, , , acknowledges that they exist.
In like fashion, the idea of artificiality could have had additional important consequences for the theories of government, especially if one recalls the context when Leviathan was written, that of the English civil war. First and foremost, an artificial element is no longer as indispensable as a natural one, and it can be replaced. The theory of political thaumaturgy until that time implied that the application of any remedy was obviously a procedure full of pain and suffering and, most importantly, avoided to provide a solution if the ruling element of the body — the sovereign, usually associated with the head or heart — was himself afflicted 2 , preferring to focus on prophylaxis.
The idea of artificiality no longer implies such restrictions, but, as we will see, Hobbes does not fully exploit the possibilities which this innovation provided. Also following the old template, Hobbes establishes the same link between the relationships existing among the parts of the body and its health. This topos of the corporal metaphor remained basically constant from the twelfth century up until the seventeenth century: harmony means health, discord brings disease.
Following the typical medical axiom, the more blatant the absence of unity, the more precarious the health of the body. The concept of soul implies the idea of immortality, so it would naturally be expected for the sovereignty to be immortal as well, if this analogy is followed to the letter. The subjects owe obedience to the sovereignty, as set by the initial covenant of the Commonwealth, because this obedience is what enables the sovereignty to fulfil its main task, which is the protection of the body politic. The traditional corporal template of the English political thought was rather simple: the king was the supreme organ, as head or heart, his subjects were the parts.
Fifty years before, Forset went as far as to ascribe to them the role of physicians of the realm, albeit subordinate to the king Forset, , A good number of state officials are left without a specific analogy — doubtless, because there are many more of them than of any body parts, thus the extent of the analogy, if one writer wants to go deep into it, is naturally limited.
Nevertheless, an important part such as the heart is left without any element of the Commonwealth being associated with it. The reason for this omission probably resides in the old importance of the heart, which was so often regarded as the chief part of the body. A solution could have been for Hobbes to establish a multiple analogy, in the manner of Edward Forset 4 , where the sovereign was not just the soul, but also the heart, yet the author avoids the issue altogether.
Just as it was the case with many of the writers making use of the corporal analogy, a metaphor of the political disease develops in Leviathan as well. We have already seen several references made by Hobbes to the potential dissolution of the Commonwealth if some unfavourable conditions were met. In making his case, Hobbes remains many a times faithful to the traditional vision of the political pathology. For him, the Commonwealth can collapse as a result of such an affliction which originates inside itself or as a result of an external aggression or an infiltration from the outside, whatever kind it might be.
Within the initial template proposed by Thomas Hobbes in his introduction to Leviathan , the law together with equity was equated to the reason and the will of the human body: the law, together with those entrusted with its enforcement, had the role of an arbiter of good and evil.
Philosophy of education
The subject was approached as early as twelfth century, by John of Salisbury, and the opinions on this issue were always quite divided. The only consensus was that the sovereign was arguably subject to divine and natural law which sometimes were considered as covering the same area, while other times they were regarded at least partially distinct , but the relationship between him and the human law was much more complex.
The opinions of all sorts of writers ranged from the idea that it was desirable for the sovereign to submit to the human law, but without being compelled to do so, to much more radical attitudes, such as that expressed by John Fortescue, who argued that a prince could not change the laws without the consent of the subjects Fortescue, , Hobbes considered thus that the sovereign was not subject to those laws whose author was himself, because the existence of a law presupposed the existence of punishments if said law was broken.
The English political thought prior to the civil war believed it had found a solution to this dilemma by establishing that the king could not be punished for breaking the law, but his agents who fulfilled a command contrary to the law could actually be brought to justice. Yet, the events after showed the limitations of this doctrine and a king was actually put on trial for his alleged transgressions. Leviathan identifies also, by using a much more direct medical terminology, a series of political diseases which afflict the Commonwealth, without the author resorting though to an analogy of a similar extent to that employed by Thomas Starkey in A Dialogue between Reginald Pole and Thomas Lupset.
We see here reflections of the ancient medicine — the theoryexpressed by Galen in De Locis Affectis asserting the existence of three spirits within the man, the vital, rational and natural spirit Dolan, Adams-Smith, , —, borrowed later by the medieval medicine, and of the political and religious struggles of that period, when the civil authority opposed the religious one.
It is worth noticing that Hobbes was the first author who approached this matter: the conflict between the monarch and the pope was never regarded in the Middle Ages as an opposition between the secular and the spiritual, but an issue of jurisdiction, including over the spiritual aspects of power wielding. Even in the case of the Anglican Reformation in the sixteenth century, it was done in a similar manner, an equivalence between the Commonwealth and the Church being established, as could be seen at Richard Hooker 5.
In medieval and early modern medicine, great importance was granted to the relationship between bodily and spiritual health and to the way the latter influenced the former.
From Natural Rights to Human Rights—And Beyond | The Heritage Foundation
Accordingly, the diseases of the Commonwealth were also, many of them, regarded in a similar manner, and the healing action of the sovereign was expected to have not just a mundane finality, but an eschatological one as well. Hobbes, though, brings about a radical innovation in this regard, separating the two powers and concluding that only the civil authority was responsible for the functioning of the Commonwealth.
If the members of the clergy constituted an important part of the body politic in many of the previous corporal templates of the political organization, Hobbes seems to be even hostile to their involvement in the government of the state:. Hobbes expresses reticence also regarding the concept of the mixed monarchy. He accepts the reality of the existence of such forms of government, but he concludes that they were not particularly beneficial for the Commonwealth.
The idea of a triple soul in the natural body was not a new one: it had been expressed by Galen, who theorized the existence of a one vital, one rational and one natural soul, and it showed up during the Middle Ages as well, both in the Galen-inspired medicine, and in theology, at Thomas Aquinas, with the model of a vegetative, a sensitive and a rational soul.
dynorawama.tk Just like Thomas Starkey more than a century earlier, albeit in a less elaborate form, the list of the diseases which afflicted the body politic according to Hobbes is one dominated by pragmatism: the issues of effective government of the Commonwealth are what concerns the author first and foremost and less the abstract matters related to dogma.
When one reads the opinions of Thomas Hobbes in this regard, he must keep in mind the fact that, during the seventeenth century, the financial power of the state influenced the most its capacity to sustain military efforts: the human factor was less important at that time, at least compared with the modern times, when the situation will turn on its head — the potential human losses turning into the main deterrent against any military adventures.
The matter of taxation and the financial burden of war possessed, during the seventeenth century, the greatest capacity to cripple a state, regardless whether it was an absolutist monarchy, such as France, or one where royal power had to face many challenges, such as the English monarchy. Charles I tried to cope with the situation by imposing many unpopular taxes, and the economic difficulties had been one of the factors, besides those connected to religious matters and the disputes with respect to the limits of royal authority, which contributed to the start of the civil war.
This difficulty ariseth from the opinion that every subject hath of a property in his lands and goods exclusive of the soveraigns right to the use of the same.