In this case, I espouse Hobbes’s theory as it is in line with the concept of psychological egoism. To a big extent, human behavior is usually motivated by self-interest. When people do things, there is always a belief (even if its unconscious)that doing that particular thing will result to benefits in one way or another even for something that is presumed to be selfless (LaFollette & Persson, 2013). This is why Hobbes postulates that self-interest drives people in establishing moral rules since the existence of morality will enable them to go on with their activities in peace.

I think the government should not be granted the authority that goes to the extent of taking people’s lives. I do not think there is anyone worthy of taking another person’s life. However, I would be willing to give up liberty like privacy for the sake of safety. In times of national security, the government ought to have the ability of breaching the right to privacy of someone who is being suspected. In case there was an attack, people would get killed, and they would not even have the opportunity of exercising this liberty (Kuznicki, 2017). The safety created ensures that people have the ability to carry on with their activities without living in fear.

Even though I support Hobbes argument, to some point I do agree to recourse in case the government violates its own contract. This is because if the government cannot protect the citizen’s natural rights, it does not have any business being there. Furthermore, this makes it difficult for the citizens to fulfil their desired self-interest.

References

Kuznicki, J. (2017). Technology and the End of Authority. Springer,.

LaFollette, H., & Persson, I. (2013). The Blackwell guide to ethical theory. Hoboken: Wiley Blackwell.

Ruggiero, V. R. (2012). Thinking critically about ethical issues (8th ed.). New York, NY: Mc-Graw Hill.