State of nature

The state of Nature, in its broadest sense, is the Universe, which is the natural state that all exists within and nothing is without.This axiom precedes any and all the political philosophies built upon it.

Within the Universe we find many naturally forming sub-states, for example, stars, planets, moons and other celestial bodies (comets, asteroids, etc..). Each of these constitute a natural state. Granted, the state of Nature of the planet Mars is quite different in many ways then Earth's state of Nature, or that of the Sun's natural state. Further, it could also be reasonably argued that a Galaxy or a Solar system also constitutes an autonomous natural state within the Universe.

Many times, when the term state of Nature is being used, it refers to the atmosphere of Earth and all within itas it is a term often found being used in political philosophy and positive international law to describe the base or absolute reality that Nation States are constituted in. This constitution of Nation States is accomplished via what is termed, "social contract" and there have been, and are, many theories that describe the hypothetical condition of the life of the members of a particular Nation State after the Nation State is constituted, and further, how these fictional juristic persons called 'Nation States' and the members of them should interact with one another in the state of Nature.

In a narrow sense, according to some theories, the state of Nature is branded as being an anarchy or a state of lawlessness. Obviously, the state of Nature has always been governed by the unwritten law or lex non scripta — all the laws which do not come under the definition of written law, which is composed, principally, of the law of nature, the law of nations, the common law, and customs. Further, in this body of law we find the principle of cause and effect, which gives rise to the teachings of, for example, the Ethic of Reciprocity, Karma, or the Golden Rule and also the many customs and systems of lex scripta or written law developed based on this principle and these teachings. These customs and/or laws (and what could be rightly called the root of the common law, due to the fact that they are common in most tribes, religions, and societies that have ever existed), are the de jure law of the state of Nature.

History

The history of the Universe or even that of Earth is quit the debate. The exact origins of the state of Nature are shrouded in mystery. The 2 most popular explanations of the point of origin are Creationism and the Big Bang.

One of the earliest written accounts of society in the state of Nature is likely that of the story of Eden or Dilmun.

In Sumerian the word "Eden" meant simply "fertile plain." The word "Adam" also existed in cuneiform, meaning something akin to "settlement on the plain." Although both words were set down first in Sumerian, along with place names like Ur and Uruk, they are not Sumerian in origin. They are older. A brilliant Assyriologist named Benno Landsberger advanced the theory in 1943 that these names were all linguistic remnants of a pre-Sumerian people who had already named rivers, cities-and even some specific trades like 'potter' and 'coppersmith' before the Sumerians appeared.

Landsberger called the pre-Sumerian language simply Proto-Euphratian. Other scholars suggest that its speakers were the Ubaidians. However it was, the existing names were incorporated into Sumerian and written down for the first time. And the mythology of the lush and lovely spot called Eden was codified by being written.

Philosophical History

Hobbes's philosophy

The concept of a state of nature was posited by the 17th century English philosopher Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan. Hobbes wrote that "during the time men live without a common power to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition which is called war; and such a war as is of every man against every man". In this state any person has a natural right to do anything to preserve his own liberty or safety, and life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." He believed that in the international arena, states behave as individuals do in a state of nature.

Within the state of nature there is no injustice, since there is no law, excepting certain natural precepts, the first of which is "that every man ought to endeavour peace, as far as he has hope of obtaining it"; and the second is "that a man be willing, when others are so too, as far forth as for peace and defence of himself he shall think it necessary, to lay down this right to all things; and be contented with so much liberty against other men as he would allow other men against himself". From this, Hobbes develops the way out of the state of nature into civil government by mutual contract.

Hobbes described the concept in the Latin phrase bellum omnium contra omnes, in his work de Cive.

Locke's view on the state of nature

John Locke considers the state of nature in his Second Treatise on Civil Government written around the time of the Engagement Controversy in England during the 1680s. For Locke, "The state of Nature has a law of Nature to govern it", and that law is Reason. Locke believes that reason teaches that "no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty or possessions"; and that transgressions of this may be punished. This view of the state of nature is partly deduced from Christian belief (unlike Hobbes, whose philosophy is not dependent upon any prior theology): the reason we may not harm another is that we are all the possessions of God and do not own ourselves.

Although it may be natural to assume that Locke was responding to Hobbes, Locke never refers to Hobbes by name, and may instead have been responding to other writers of the day.

Rousseau and Marx

Hobbes's view was challenged in the eighteenth century by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, who claimed that Hobbes was taking socialized persons and simply imagining them living outside of the society in which they were raised. He affirmed instead that people were naturally good. Men knew neither vice nor virtue since they had almost no dealings with each other. Their bad habits are the products of civilization. A similar criticism put forth by Karl Marx is the concept of the species being, the idea that humans were getting along as a communal society of mutual benefit before class was instituted. For Marx and others in his line of critical theory, alienated and abstracted social relations prevent the fulfillment of this potential.

Hume's theory

David Hume's view brings together and challenges the theories of Rousseau and Hobbes. He posits that in the natural state we are born wicked and evil because of, for instance, the cry of the baby that demands attention. Like Rousseau, he believes that society shapes us, but that we are born evil and it is up to society to shape us into who we become.

Hume turns away from Locke and Hobbes's stressed independence, instead placing the focus on the family. Hume does not want to go as far as Pope, describing an 'ever widening circle of affection' that's epicentre is the family. Instead Hume notices some weaknesses in family life, stating the remedy is society. However, for society to flourish it is necessary for there to be the 'Rules of Justice.' These rules are necessary due to the 'insecurity of man' that can only be remedied in justice.

20th century

John Rawls used what amounted to an artificial state of nature. To develop his Theory of Justice, Rawls places everyone in the original position. The original position is a hypothetical state of nature used as a thought experiment to develop Rawls' theory of justice. People in the original position have no society and are under a veil of ignorance that prevents them from knowing how they may benefit from society. They do not know if they will be smart or dumb, rich or poor, or anything else about their fortunes and abilities. Rawls reasons that people in the original position would want a society where they had their basic liberties protected and where they had some economic guarantees as well. If society were to be constructed from scratch through a social agreement between individuals, these principles would be the expected basis of such an agreement. Thus, these principles should form the basis of real, modern societies since everyone should consent to them if society were organized from scratch in fair agreements.

Between nations

In Hobbes's view, once a civil government is instituted, the state of nature has disappeared between individuals because of the civil power which exists to enforce contracts. Between nations, however, no such power currently exists and therefore nations have the same rights to preserve themselves - including making war - as individuals possessed.

Rawls also examines the state of nature between nations. In his work the Law of Peoples, Rawls applies a modified version of his original position thought experiment to international relations. Rawls says that people, not states, form the basic unit that should be examined. States should be encouraged to follow the principles from Rawls's earlier Theory of Justice. Democracy seems like it would be the most logical means of accomplishing these goals, but benign non-democracies should be seen as acceptable at the international stage. Rawls develops eight principles for how people should act on an international stage.