Thomas Hobbes, a 17th-century English philosopher, is best known for his work Leviathan (1651), where he lays the foundation for modern political philosophy through the theory of the social contract. At the core of Hobbes’ social contract is the concept of political obligation — the moral and practical duty of individuals to obey the authority of the sovereign. Hobbes developed his theory against the backdrop of the English Civil War, which deeply influenced his perception of human nature, authority, and the need for political order.
Human Nature and the State of Nature
To understand Hobbes’ theory of obligation, we must first examine his depiction of the state of nature — a hypothetical condition in which humans live without government or laws. In this natural state, individuals are equal in their capacity to harm or kill each other, and driven by self-interest, fear, and the desire for self-preservation. Hobbes famously describes life in this condition as “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.”
In such a state, there is no security or justice, as there is no common authority to enforce rules. The state of nature, therefore, is a state of perpetual war of every man against every man. From this bleak scenario arises the necessity of a social contract, which becomes the mechanism through which individuals voluntarily give up certain freedoms to secure peace and survival.
The Social Contract and Political Obligation
Hobbes’ social contract is not a mutual agreement among citizens to share power but rather an agreement among individuals to submit all their rights and power to a single sovereign — a person or body capable of enforcing laws and maintaining order. In exchange, the sovereign provides security and ensures the conditions for civil society. The contract is thus between individuals, not between the people and the ruler.
This agreement gives rise to the duty of political obligation. Individuals are morally and rationally obligated to obey the sovereign because it is in their best interest to do so. The alternative — returning to the state of nature — is worse. For Hobbes, the legitimacy of the sovereign derives not from divine right or popular consent per se, but from the fact that only a sovereign with absolute authority can guarantee peace and prevent civil war.
Political obligation in Hobbes’ theory is absolute and enduring. Once the contract is made, individuals are bound to obey the sovereign’s laws and decisions. The sovereign cannot be said to break the contract because he is not a party to it — he is the result of it. Therefore, rebellion against the sovereign is unjustified except in cases where the sovereign can no longer provide protection, as self-preservation remains a core natural right.
Obligation and Fear
A unique aspect of Hobbes’ theory is his grounding of political obligation not in moral duty or natural virtue, but in fear and rational self-interest. People obey laws because they fear the consequences of disobedience — both from the sovereign and from the threat of anarchy. Fear, for Hobbes, is not a weakness but a rational motivator that underpins stable political life.
Thus, Hobbes’ view of obligation is instrumental and pragmatic: we are obligated to obey not because the ruler is morally superior, but because order is preferable to chaos. This contrasts with later thinkers like John Locke, who based political obligation on the preservation of natural rights and limited government.
Criticism and Legacy
Hobbes’ theory of obligation has been widely criticized for its authoritarian implications. By vesting unlimited power in the sovereign, Hobbes leaves no room for civil liberties, democratic participation, or the right to revolution. Critics argue that his emphasis on fear and coercion overlooks the possibility of voluntary, morally grounded forms of political association.
However, Hobbes’ concept of political obligation has also been influential. He was one of the first to present the state as a human construct, based on consent rather than divine mandate or tradition. His rational, secular account of political authority helped lay the foundation for modern legal and constitutional theory.
Furthermore, Hobbes’ insights into the fragility of political order and the psychological basis of obedience remain relevant today, especially in discussions about state legitimacy, emergency powers, and authoritarianism. His theory challenges us to consider what individuals owe to the state and under what conditions such obligations can be morally justified.
Conclusion
Thomas Hobbes’ concept of obligation in the social contract is grounded in fear, self-preservation, and rational calculation. For Hobbes, people are obligated to obey the sovereign because it is the only way to avoid the horrors of the state of nature. Although his theory justifies absolute authority, it also reflects a realistic assessment of human behavior and the need for political order. Hobbes offers a stark but foundational vision of why people submit to authority and what sustains political obligation in a world of competing interests and fears.
Leave a Reply