Strauss and Watkins on Hobbes' Political Philosophy: A Review

STRAUSS AND WATKINS ON HOBBES 189
root of Hobbes’s interest in science, <strong>and</strong> that there are probably two
conceptions of “nature” present in Hobbes’s writings, i.e., the ex-
plicit monism <strong>and</strong> the presupposed dualism. <strong>Strauss</strong> concludes that
the influence of mathematics <strong>and</strong> science was to clarify the logic but
obscure the motives of Hobbes—the later stages of Hobbes’s thought
worked out most clearly the concepts but thereby concealed most
fully Hobbes’s motives. Ergo, one should read Leviathan for
teachings, but read the “Introduction” to Thucydides <strong>and</strong> the
Elements for motives.
An Evaluation of <strong>Strauss</strong>’s “The Political Philosophy of Hobbes”
<strong>Strauss</strong>’s purpose.
This book does not explicate the texts or explain the relationships
between one idea <strong>and</strong> another in Leviathan or De Cive. Nor does
this book provide a philosophical evaluation of Hobbes’s success in
achieving his oft professed objective of building scientific civil
philosophy on the basis of mechanical science.
Instead, <strong>Strauss</strong> assumes that the reader is acquainted with both
the Hobbesian texts <strong>and</strong> the inconsistencies which appear when
Hobbes is understood as giving moral content to natural <strong>and</strong> civil
“right” <strong>and</strong> “obligation.” Thereupon, <strong>Strauss</strong> carries out a kind of
intellectual archeology by which he digs down through the last
layers of Hobbes’s writings past the earliest layers to reconstruct the
original foundations. Indeed, Hobbes’s logical differences <strong>and</strong> in-
consistencies are the clues by which he uncovers the origins of
Hobbes’s philosophy in a distinctive stance—called Hobbes’s
“philosophy”—which Hobbes nowhere states explicitly. Shortly
after publishing this book on Hobbes, <strong>Strauss</strong> wrote:
. . . scholars of the last century were inclined to solve literary problems by hav-
ing recourse to the genesis of the author’s work, or even of his thought. Con-
tradictions or divergencies within one book, or between two books by the same
author, were supposed to prove that his thought had changed. 1
This is exactly what <strong>Strauss</strong> does in The Political Philosophy of
Hobbes. Precisely because <strong>Strauss</strong> is seeking for the basis <strong>and</strong> the
genesis of Hobbes’s thought, <strong>Strauss</strong>’s book will not be useful to most
1. Leo <strong>Strauss</strong>, Persecution <strong>and</strong> the Art of Writing (Glencoe, IL: The Free Press,
1952), 30-31 (Hereafter referred to as PAW).