Hobbes2 - promises may have also been unable to grant As...

Info iconThis preview shows page 1. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Christina Zinkel The act of governing power instituting is divided between two likely outcomes. In the placement of a ruler the power might have placed oneself within that position. As such people must have been behind them because of the power they showed to obtain such. Whereas the other requires the people to elect the ruler, in this case the people may have made a seemingly better choice for themselves but their say is also insignificant without the agreement of many others. The fear going into each of these forms of elect varies as well. The ruler must have instilled fear in those around him in order to reach such a societal peak. The people are afraid of his wrath and thus follow. On the other hand, the need for consensus in finding a ruler often leads to fear of thy neighbor for these are the people having a say in the future of all. Though certainly much of the worry is lifted once a ruler is placed, the promises of such may now be granted, this person could also show a more worrisome desire to harm those who may have aided. The
Background image of page 1
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: promises may have also been unable to grant. As such the governing is not as liable for the people expected the unavailable. Once one attains such a prestige it is not as easily transferred. Thus the sovereign may determine the fate of all in the event of passing of all that is governed. One is also exempt from much suffered by constituents. The punishments and accusations are left solely to those beneath. In charge of all law and conflict the powerful seem unlimited. The people may take action against but such is must harder than previously. The governing became absolute. The ruler is laden with all rewards. Honor and right to anything and everything, the only expense of which is the maintenance of the state, the ruler is thus in charge and may do well for those beneath but almost has not motive to do so. If there is limitless pleasure why would it be a desire to care for those beneath who will follow orders either way?...
View Full Document

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Ask a homework question - tutors are online