Hobbesian Instinctual Reason versus Rousseau’s Instinctual Innocence: Backstage logic of colonial expansions and origin of the left–right political dichotomy

Abstract

This essay discusses three dimensions that differentiate Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan from Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s Discourse on the Origins of Inequality in which the origins of the Left–Right political distinction and the seeds of the colonialist–anticolonialist debate can be explored. The study initially focuses on the diametrically opposed political ideas of the two philosophers regarding the “state of nature” and their perception of human nature in general. The second section is based on the fundamental differences between the two philosophers’ trust and distrust of human nature. In the third setion the essay tries to assess the two authors’ disagreements over the notion of progress, and synthesizes a new concept, instinctual reason, which is distilled from a Hobbesian chain of thought and Rousseau’s subsequent criticism. Through this synthesis, the study aims to elucidate the backstage logic of imperialist/colonialist expansions and explore the origins of the Left–Right distinction. In the final analysis, this essay aims to reveal that Hobbesian instinctual reason is one of the primary impulses of colonialist expansions, whilst Rousseau’s instinctual innocence is in essence anticolonialist. By the same token, the essay argues the Hobbesian position in these three dimensions constitutes the origins of modern right-wing political ideologies, whilst Rousseau’s position has inspired the leftist stance.