State of nature and social contract, nominalism, right of nature, law of nature.
I shall start by unravelling the process of thought, the method behind the man, as with many philosophers the argument begins with the method of deduction and hypothesis, and so by looking at Hobbes in such a way we might well learn the means in which his arguments are constructed.
Nominalism is the process of thought that deals only with what is real, real in the sense that it is an argument built from premises, that in themselves can-not contain facts that are mere predictions or science; words therefore are relevant as long as they are in the context of the individual. â€œa universe is only a wordâ€ (Leviathan, chp,4)
Counter examples come form philosophers like Quine.W.O.V (1908-pres) nominalism is rejected and arguments are ignored. Preferring instead to use Ontological Frugality, a process by which arguments are made through empiricist premises, and the rejection of all â€˜meaningfulâ€™ statements that refer to immediate experiences, that can not, in themselves be substantiated through empirical date.
Such nominalist arguments, are by their very nature apposed to Platonism and realism (nominalism vs. ontological) in which things like properties, class, and propositions are denied as they are formâ€™s of abstraction.
For Hobbes the nomological argument is beyond question, as he writes â€œ science, that is, ignorance of causes disposeth, or rather constraineth a man to rely on the advice, and authority of othersâ€ (Leviathan, chp,4,15:28-29) such nomological arguments allows Hobbes to ignore such issues as class, and social hierarchy, thus allowing him to provide us with the idea that all men are equal.
Hobbesâ€™s construction of the state, as a nominalist hypothesis, begins with the division of history into two categories; â€˜natural history,â€™ which is the effects of nature, and the