GENERAL TASK: Write a carefully constructed essay on ONE of the topics listed below:
Whether you pick topic one or topic two, your essay should demonstrate an understanding of the
moral theories presented by Hobbes and Kant. In addition, your essay must demonstrate progress in your own
thinking about the questions raised by the essay topic you have chosen. In other words, in addition to
explaining the issues and arguments, and to evaluating the merits of those arguments, you are required to
compare the strengths/weakness of the accounts presented by Hobbes and Kant and to position your own
view in relation to these. You must provide reasons and arguments for the stance you take.
After you have chosen the topic for your paper, the assignment requires that you
(a) clearly formulate and explain the positions;
(b) give the main argument or arguments in their defence;
(c) state as clearly and forcefully as you can the main objections against each account
and (d) draw your own conclusion as to their relative merits.
You are not expected to provide a definitive or unassailable defence of the account you favour but you are
required to make some contribution of your own to the debate you depict between Hobbes and Kant. Your
essay should testify to the fact that you have made a determined effort to grapple with the problem.
You should design your essay for an audience of people who are of roughly your own degree of
education and intellectual development, but who have not done the readings or attended the course. In other
words, write for a cold audience. You should also strive for a clear and simple writing style. Make sure that
you explain the crucial terminology. Try to organize your essay so that each part of it builds up a defence of
your conclusion in a way that your audience will be able to follow and understand and in a manner that your
audience will find persuasive.
TOPIC ONE: THE BASIS OF MORALITY
Kant and Hobbes give conflicting accounts of the role played by reason versus the role played by
desire/inclination in the determination of what is “good”, “evil”, “right” or “wrong”. Kant tries to
formulate a purely rational principle which provides the latent underpinning for ordinary views
about what has unconditional moral value. According to Hobbes, ordinary experience establishes
that human beings are essentially self-interested and driven by desire/aversion. Therefore, morality
must ultimately be grounded by subjective self-interests. Explain and compare Hobbes’ and Kant’s
accounts of the foundations of morality. Identify and explain the key points and sources of difference.
To what extent do these accounts differ as a consequence of different accounts of human nature? To
what extent do they differ as a consequence of different conceptions of reasoning and rationality? To
what extent do they differ as a consequence of different conceptions of morality? Which account best
gels with our ordinary experiences and moral convictions? Why do you think so? Be sure to support
your view with arguments.
TOPIC TWO: THE RELATION BETWEEN LAWS & LEGISLATORS
According to Kant, a human being’s greatest virtue is the capacity to be rational and self-governing.
For Kant, in acting from duty, one is literally giving oneself a code or law by which to live and this
autonomy is the basis of the dignity of human nature. Thus, Kant’s fourth formulation of the
categorical imperative enjoins that we, ACT AS UNIVERSAL LEGISLATORS. According to
Hobbes, human reason dictates that our greatest hope for attaining peace is to lay down our natural
right to everything and make an agreement to BECOME SUBJECT TO AN ABSOLUTE
LEGISLATOR. Explain and compare the structural organization of these two contrasting views of our
relation to the “LAW”. Be sure to provide a clear exegesis of the relevant details of each account.
How does Kant’s notion of a “good will” relate to his formulations of the categorical imperative. How
does Kant’s conception of the categorical imperative differ from Hobbes conception of the law of
nature and rules of civil society? How do these differences relate to their respective conceptions of
liberty? Would the sovereign as characterized by Hobbes be autonomous according to Kant? Would
the subjects of a sovereign as characterized by Hobbes be autonomous according to Kant? Does
submitting to the absolute power of a sovereign entail a form of servitude? If so, would this be
repugnant to the dignity of human beings or is it really our best bet given our nature? In your view,
which account is more accurate? more persuasive? well ground? Be sure to support your view with
arguments.
Keep in mind that the key to a well-written paper is a well-written INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH.
A well-written introduction serves two purposes: 1) it stands alone as an account of the general issue in your
own words, and 2) it serves as an introduction to your own paper by outlining the structure and organization
of your paper. Strive for a strong opening.
Your critical summary should be about 1500 words in length, preferably typed double-spaced
(normal font & margins). Essays notably longer than 1600 words may be penalized. You should be ready to
hand-in the hard-copy of your paper at the beginning of the lecture. Late assignments will be
penalized 5 points out of 100 points for each day, or part thereof. E
There is a series of slots, find the one with my name on it and submit your paper. It will be date stamped by
the secretary at the end of the day.
