What is the right of self-defense against the sovereign?

Translation: quotations from Thomas Hobbes are quoted in the 1651 English version of De Cive (Philosophical Rudiments), attributed to Hobbes himself, not his original words.

1. WHAT HE SAID (the record)

Record ledger

• BELIEF (undated; quoted in the 1651 English version of De Cive (Philosophical Rudiments), attributed to Hobbes himself): Thomas Hobbes believed that every man has a right to use all means necessary for his own preservation, including judging for himself what actions are necessary for that purpose. This belief is grounded in his view that the right of nature is the liberty to use natural faculties according to right reason, with the primary aim of preserving life. [1]
• BELIEF (undated; quoted in the 1651 English version of De Cive (Philosophical Rudiments), attributed to Hobbes himself): Thomas Hobbes believed that individuals retain a right of defending themselves against violence, even after submitting to a sovereign or council. This is grounded in his argument that union involves submitting wills but not the right to defend oneself against violence. (key quote above) [2]
• BELIEF (undated; quoted in the 1651 English version of De Cive (Philosophical Rudiments), attributed to Hobbes himself): Thomas Hobbes argues that the right of self-defense is a fundamental law of nature, which is to seek peace where it may be had, and where not, to defend ourselves. This is grounded in his view of the law of nature. [3]
• BELIEF (undated): Thomas Hobbes argues that the right of self-defense against the sovereign exists when a group of men, after committing a capital crime, resist the sovereign power to defend their lives. He claims that such resistance is not unjust if it is solely to defend their persons, but that an offer of pardon removes the plea of self-defense and makes further resistance unlawful. (key quote above) [4]
• BELIEF (undated): Thomas Hobbes believed that the right of self-defense against the sovereign does not exist, because resistance to the sovereign's essential rights is forbidden by the law of nature and cannot be justified as a civil law obligation. He argues that any resistance is seen as an act of hostility. (key quote above) [5]
• BELIEF (undated): Thomas Hobbes argues that in a commonwealth where particular men are deprived of their right to protect themselves, there resides an absolute sovereignty. He states that if no person has the right to punish or resist the sovereign, then the sovereign has absolute power over all others, which is the essence of sovereignty. "In every commonwealth, where particular men are deprived of their right to protect themselves, there resideth an absolute sovereignty, as I have already showed." [6]

What cuts against it

• The contrary-evidence entries are already in the record ledger above: [6].

2. HOW IT APPLIES (reasoning; inference is marked)

1. Thomas Hobbes believed that the right of self-defense is a natural right, grounded in the law of nature, which allows individuals to use all necessary means to preserve their lives. [1]

2. He also argued that individuals retain a right to defend themselves against violence, even after submitting to a sovereign or council. [2]

3. However, he made a distinction: in cases where a group of men has committed a capital crime and faces death, they may have the liberty to resist the sovereign to defend their lives. [4]

4. But in general, Hobbes held that resistance to the sovereign's essential rights is forbidden by the law of nature and cannot be justified as a civil law obligation. [5]

5. This contradiction suggests that Hobbes may have made a distinction between resistance by individuals and resistance by groups, or between resistance in specific circumstances and resistance as a general right. (Inference)

3. HIS TAKE

Record coverage: PARTIAL

The record is silent on whether Thomas Hobbes believed in a general right of self-defense against the sovereign in all circumstances. However, he did argue that resistance to the sovereign's essential rights is forbidden by the law of nature and cannot be justified as a civil law obligation. [5]

Extrapolation: Thomas Hobbes likely believed that the right of self-defense against the sovereign is limited to specific circumstances, such as when a group of men, after committing a capital crime, resist to defend their lives. However, in general, he held that subjects cannot justly resist the sovereign, as such resistance is seen as an act of hostility and violates the law of nature. [4] [5]

Competing readings: One reading is that Hobbes believed in a limited right of self-defense against the sovereign in specific circumstances, as shown in [4]. Another reading is that he believed in no such right at all, as shown in [5]. The record itself supports both readings, and neither can be said to be definitive.

Confidence: Moderate, due to the conflicting statements in the record and the lack of direct evidence on the question.