In search of the inner drive dominating human motives, Thomas Hobbes and Adam Smith generally agree on the powerful motivation of self-interest. In Leviathan (1651), Hobbes constructs the natural men as individualistic, unfettered power-seeking animals, whose free-operating self-interest would force them to live in a disastrous eternal war. However, this self-centering nature is also the prime mover towards establishment of society and government, where men practice moderation of personal interest to attain a peaceful and cooperative life. Within the narrower context of modern economics in The Wealth of Nations (1776), Adam Smith confirms Hobbes's idea that self-interest could indeed serve public welfare. He asserts that the human nature to look after their own welfare, under "a well-governed society," will lead to a more efficient economy, and ultimately generate "universal opulence" (11). Despite their agreement on social impacts of self-interest, Hobbes and Smith arrive at their conclusion in different ways, particularly in their discussion of the authority figure. My paper will examine the role of government and rule of law in the Leviathan and The Wealth of Nations as potential solution to the problem of how individuals temper their private desires in light of public interest. .
First, Hobbes and Smith both recognize the main drive governing human actions: self-interest. In Leviathan, Hobbes perceives man as egoists, always urged by desires for "objects:" "of the voluntary acts of every man, the object is some good to himself" (Hobbes, 12). These desires would never be fully satisfied, because "the object of mans desire, is not to enjoy once onely but to assure forever, the way of his future desire" (Hobbes, 6). Hobbes removes mankind from a governed-society to observe their "natural condition," in which men continually seek "power," the ability to satisfy their desires (Hobbes, 6).
