Analysis of the Existence of Bodies in Motion by Thomas Hobbes

Thomas Hobbes - A 16th Century Famous Modern Political philosopher

Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679) is an English philosopher and politician. He is much concerned with political philosophies, and wrote major books to clarify his political philosophies namely, Leviathan and De Cive (the citizen). Hobbes read Descartes’ Meditations before their publications and raised several criticisms, which together with Descartes’ rejoinders were published by Descartes. About ten years later, 1651, Hobbes published his own major work, Leviathan.

Hobbes was on close terms with many of the best scientists and mathematicians of the period, including most significantly Galileo, and their discoveries seemed to him to imply clearly that all things are made of material particles and that all charge reduce to motion.

According to Hobbes , there are two divisions of philosophy: natural and civil. Through his enormously important philosophy was his “civil” or political, now we will only examine Hobbes natural philosophy. In natural philosophy, Hobbes has been discussing various philosophical problems/questions but we will be much concerned with his basic concept in motion.

This theory that all is matter in motion may well strike you as implausible may be even ridiculous. Nevertheless, as we will see later, this theory is quite attractive to many contemporary philosophers and scientists (psychologists) even “we” as upcoming philosophers.

Now we will commence our discussion by seeing how Hobbes treats this theory of motion in every aspect then comparing him with other philosophers who together have already discussed the matter.

The question of motion is not been firstly treated by Thomas Hobbes, even his philosophical predecessors in Ancient Greek (Classical Philosophers) and Medieval one, has been in serious discussion about motion. Most of philosophers have come in agreement that things are in motion that is the question of motion/change is obvious, but still other philosophers refuted it (philosophers like Anaximander, Xeno, and Parmenides) refuses the presence of motion. That been the case, Thomas Hobbes is among philosophers who admit the presence of motion/change in beings.

Thomas Hobbes considered the Theory of Motion in the aspect of object of thought. His philosophy is chiefly concerned with causes and characteristics of bodies. According to Hobbes, there are three major types of bodies;

• Physical Body
• Human Body
• Body Politic

The three major bodies share the same and one principle character which is motion.

Nevertheless, Hobbes affirms that only bodies exist. For him, that which is called substance must have a body. In other words, he is trying to say that, everything in existence are in material or incorporeal does not exist. Every reality is material, bodies exist and they are always in motion.

Since everything for him is material, there is no way that we can know immaterial bodies. If God exists, exists as a material substance. Spiritual beings must have material body in themselves in order to exist. When arguing about the use of speech, he said, there are also correspondent abuses of speech to these uses.

“First, when men register their thoughts wrong, by the inconstancy of the signification of their words; by which they register for their conceptions, that which they never conceived, and do deceive themselves.

Secondly, when they use words metaphorically; that is, in other sense than that they are ordained for; and thereby deceives others…”

Here, Hobbes is saying that, the manner how speech serves to the remembrance of consequence of causes and effects and in imposing names has the direct connection with the senses we use to see, hear, touch, taste and smell. He says “The original of them all, is that which we call SENSE, for there is no conceptions in man’s mind which has not first, totally or by parts been together upon the organs of sense”. For him, the materiality of beings is the most important part in defining substance and its corresponding motion, that is why even when he talk about knowledge also he consider senses as a work of bodies in his definition.

After all, Hobbes defined motion as a continual relinquishing at one place and acquiring at another. Motion have also means change, hence not only limited to locomotion. A substance is not a cause of its own change/motion. In order for something to move it needs to be moved by another. That which moves is been moved by another at the same time, that which does not move, remains constant until it been moved. “When a body is once in motion, it moveth (unless something else hinder it) eternally; and whatever hindreth it, cannot instant, but in time and by degrees quite extinguish it…” only a moving can cause a resting body to move.

          ”that when a thing lies still, unless something else stir it, it will lie still forever, is a truth         that no man doubts of. But that when a thing is in motion, it will eternally be in motion,    unless somewhat else stir it, though the reason be the same (namely, that nothing change        itself)…”

Accordingly, the basic premise of Hobbes’ metaphysics is that all that exists is bodies in motion. There are two main types of bodies, physical bodies and political bodies. Now, change is also physical as well as mental. Physical change (bodies) involves human and animals. It is that which extends from birth (child-adolescent-adult-matured) to death. This is VITAL change/motion, is voluntary one, it is necessary connected with imagination. It is the change occurred willingly. For example walking, speaking, movement of limbs and the like.

However, the notion that all that exists is bodies in motion might sound absurd until you consider such things as thoughts or acts of volition or emotion. The question here is, can it be really be held that thoughts is just matter in motion? That emotions are? That love is? Hobbes said yes! They are! Hobbes strategy was to show that there is a basic mental activity, perceptions, as he called it “SENSE” from which all other mental phenomena are derived and that perception itself reduces to matter in motion.

Perception, he shows, can occur as follows: motion in the external world causes motion within us. This motion within (he called it Phantasm) is experienced by us as an external object having certain properties. The properties do not really exist in objects, they are just the way the objects seem to us, Hobbes said. So, motion outside us causes motion within us, which is the perception. If the internal motion remains for a while even after the external object is no longer present, it is then imagination or memory. And thinking, he said, is merely a sequence of these perceptions.

After all good explanation about Hobbes’ bodies in motion, we have something little to discuss. Hobbes had successfully discussed about motion in the aspect of causes and effects, though he never shown the primar fundamental principle of his motion. Who initiate this motion? And to whom is this motion directed to? Is this motion eternal? Or does it go infinite? Or has it got its first and final principle?

In his own words Hobbes asserted “whatsoever we imagine is finite…” therefore there is no conception of anything we call infinite. No man can have in his mind an image of finite magnitude; no conceive infinite time or infinite force, or infinite power. When we say thing is infinite, we signify only, that we are not able to conceive ends, and bounds of the things named; having no conception of thing, but of our own inability.

Thomas Hobbes is in the strong belief that everything has got its magnitude, that is, its beginning and its end (its scope in motion and power) though he failed to show the first mover. The question is, it every moving thing has been moved by another, does this motion go infinitively which he has already refuted? Who then moved firstly to cause others to move?

Despite these good arguments, Hobbes failed in establishing the nature of this motion or change. If he still defend his weak materialistic argument that only material substances exist and deny the existence of immaterial beings/substances, how would we reach the point of first mover outside material being? Understanding of things which are not prompted by senses, according to Hobbes, is deception. He said “The original of them all, is that which we call SENSE, for there is no conceptions in a man’s mind which hath not first, totally or by parts, been begetter upon the organs of sense”. Here Hobbes is showing how difficult is to conceive the immaterial things “And therefore, the name of God used not to make us conceive him; (but that we honor”. The failure to understand the immaterial beings through senses is that which made Hobbes to deny their existence, that is why weak arguments.

Unfortunately, it seems as Hobbes, did not understand clearly the doctrines of Aristotle concerning his theory of motion in the aspect of act and potency. The understanding of motion, according to Aristotle is overwhelmed by the by the understanding of potentiality of and actuality, of things in change. A cause is an ontological principle which exercises a positive influence upon the “to be” of something else. Cause is that which contribute positively to the production of anything-whatever exert any real and positively influence in bringing anything to pass from the state of potentiality to the corresponding state of actuality. And that brings about motion. Therefore, cause is an ontological principle.

Now for us to get a clear understanding of motion and its primar mover let’s look briefly how Aristotle understand it generally. Matter and form provides potentialities which actualize themselves in to a required form. Matter holds in itself the features which are presupposition and which will develop in to a required form. Matter acts in respect to particular form (that is the end).

So, motion cannot be understood without making references to Act and Potency because motion requires that in reaching the case of potentiality there is a tendency to actualization. New actualization become new potentiality ready for actuality. The presence of potentiality is in accordance with the nature of the thing. This thing/object/entity is directed to an end, and this end become a new beginning.

For every free agent (Act) there is an end, a free agent cannot avoid acting for and end. The end is the first (cause) in the order of intention (being directed toward) and the last in the order of execution (implementation, realization, and actualization). First cause is the one which is full and absolutely independent of anything else in the exercise of its causality.

In the book of “categories” Aristotle states that, there six types of motion (Generation Vs Destruction, Increase Vs Decrease, Alteration and Change with respect to place). There is no motion without respect for substance. Since the substance remain the same, motion is only with respect to quality, quantity and place. Every motion proceeds from something and it is directed to something. The primary object which is in motion and that from which it is moved and that to which it is moved are all distinct.

Everything that is in motion, is necessarily being moved by something if it does not have the source of motion in itself. It means that, if there is a motion there must be a mover or something which cause it. If motion is continuous there must be one mover who remain the same, who is immovable, unrenderable and unalterable.

Aristotle argues that, there is always one principle, principle of a being can’t be many. This means also, there can’t be many first causes. This first cause is unmoved mover, there can’t be many unmoved movers. The unmoved mover is eternal, not at rest, he is prior to all movers, and that is, he is the first of all beings. He is alive because he is actuality not in potency. Since he is in actuality (pure act) he is immutable, there is no change in him (there is no potentiality in him). He is a substance in self-existence Being, he doesn’t depend on other beings in order to exist.

Now, as a substance, the unmoved mover is eternal and is in actuality, that is; it has all protections in him. He is incorruptible, indestructible, immutable, and infinite because has no matter but form (Grandeur or Magnitude of Him) he is indivisible and simple /has no parts.

Aristotle defends the existence of unmoved mover as follows:

“Since everything in motion is being moved by something, everything whose motion is in place must also be moved by another and also the mover is being moved by another; that is, if it too is in motion and also that other mover is being moved by another, now, this does not go on to infinity but stops at some point of being moved”. (Physics, VII, 2429, 15-20).

According to Aristotle, unmoved mover has ordered everything, their functions and behavior are derived to him, and he is the principle of order and generation. All sensible things which exists by nature are generated and their generation can’t go on infinitively, there might be one being who the source of all generation is, and that is unmoved mover. He is one; “The rule of many is not good let one the ruler be”, so, he is the ruler (the king) of the universe. Strictly speaking, Aristotle ideas are based on oneness of the principle of universe, and these ideas are centered on the concept of motion.

Unlike Hobbes, Aristotle has affirmed the existence of spirit (pure form) though he used the term unmoved mover, this is what medieval philosophers called “God”. God is nature and the principle of all motions either externally or internal our senses. God is the sense of all our knowledge (omniscience; that is, all knowing).

Matter brings potentialities to substances, so how can a material substance (remember that matter is the sign of imperfection) initiate motion or move others? If that is the case then, does the imperfect beings move others imperfect ones? Or we should agree that motion goes to infinite? Hobbes must tell us now who is that mover, who is material but perfect; that is, has no any sign of potentiality, who is self-existent and pure Act.

Nevertheless, Hobbes must remember that motion implies that, the change in quality, quantity and location. According to him, reality is finite (material) therefore limited. If the reality is limited just like that means is not eternal, he said “No man therefore can conceive anything, but must conceive it in some place; and endued with some determined magnitude”, so, how the finite ideas can move other finite ones in terms of quality, quantity and places?

Hobbes, therefore, can decide to consent with me, Aristotle and other Philosophers who advocated the first cause; as one principle to be immaterial, spiritual and pure form. Philosophers like Plato, St. Augustine, St. Thomas, St. Anselm and others have shown clearly the immateriality of substances such as: God and ideas. Transcendence of humans makes their thought reach the infinite ideas and the infinite reality. If the cause could not be infinite/eternal its effects then could have not reached that far (the infinitives). Hobbes’ philosophy aroused considerable antagonism-the charge was that Hobbes was an atheist-and in his later years his work has to be printed outside his own country in Amsterdam. 

REFERENCES

Moore, B. N. and Bruder K. (2005). Philosophy the Power of Ideas: 6^th Edition. USA: Mc Grow-Hill Inc.

Hobbes, T. (1651). Leviathan/the Matter. Forme and Power of a Common-Wealth. Amsterdam,    Netherlands: Ecclesiastical and Civil.