This paper is a critique on Alexandra Vascos paper on Hobbes moral and political

philosophy in the context of terrorism and the K to 12 program. In this paper, first, I
would like to analyze Hobbes theory and to show its problems in the context of Vascos
argument. Second, I would like to examine and to present the problems that I have
encountered in Hobbes theory in the context of his work, the Leviathan.
In Hobbes social and political philosophy, I believe that there are three key ideas: the
human nature, the covenant and the sovereign. Hobbes conception of human nature is
characterized by selfishness, chaos, fear and violence. He believes that apart from each
other, each man care only for his own needs and not for others. Man is also in conflict
with others because of competition, diffidence and glory. However, amidst those terrible
human conditions, people seek for peace. The only way to attain it is through entering a
social covenant where people will give some of their liberties as much as the others to
their chosen sovereign who will, in turn, maintain the peace and security in that society.
Hobbes acknowledges that a covenant is just a bunch of empty words if the people who
agreed upon it did not keep it. That is why it is the sovereigns duty is to punish those
who will transgress the covenant. Now, this sovereigns power and rights is greater than
that of any individual in the society. He is the one responsible for running the state,
making the laws, and having the first and final say in all of the disputes concerning the
state. Also, in Hobbes words: [the sovereigns] power cannot, without his consent, be
transferred to another; he cannot forfeit it; he cannot be accused by any of his subjects
of injury, he cannot be punished by them.
In her paper