I found myself thinking a lot about Maggie's question. To quote her, "...I was little and our teachers and parents would always tell us that it is good to be different. Also, they would say being different just means you have something unique about yourself that makes you special in your own way. So, is Hobbes telling us the opposite by saying that competition is wrong? Does he think that everyone should be the same and not be individuals?"


I want Maggie to define "the opposite" just so we are clear on the definition here. But because she didn't, I'll just assume that by "the opposite," she meant that Hobbes believes we should all be the same or relatively similar so none of us stand out. 


I want to answer her question by saying no. I don't think Hobbes believes we should all be the same. Besides it seeming relatively impossible to accomplish, it's just not built into our nature to act just like one another- we simply all have different personalities. HOWEVER, I think Hobbes believes something similar that could be easily confused with "being the same." Hobbes doesn't necessarily want us to BE the same, but simply to have some of the same beliefs. We've talked in class about how all humans share their want for two things- peace and security. This is what unites us and enables us to write a social treaty that everyone will agree with. People that share the same belief will make easier or eliminate all together at least two of the six reasons Hobbes believes humans cannot live together peacefully.


First, this covenant- if all people within a certain community had the same beliefs on what is necessary from the people and from their leader, it would be astronomically easier to write a social contract. There would be little room for debate as to what is in it/what it covers because everyone would have the same opinions.


Second, competition- say Team Red and Team Blue are playing a soccer game against each other- they are competing because they want different things. Team Red wants to leave with the trophy and wants Team Blue to go home empty handed. Team Blue wants to leave with the trophy and wants Team Red to go home empty-handed. They both have wants that counteract each other and that's where the competition starts. Now, consider this- the Red team wants the trophy because they wanted to give it to a hobo with whom they became friends with. This hobo really liked shiny things and the Red team wanted to give the trophy to him out of the kindness of their hearts. The Blue Team happened to befriend the same hobo and also wanted to give this hobo a shiny trophy, so they were working very hard to get it for him! Suddenly the Red Team and Blue Team discovered they both each playing for the trophy to give to the shiny-thing-deprived hobo, and, wow! The competition between them has now diminished significantly because they realized they were both playing for the same thing. Now that they have the same goal in mind, it doesn't matter so much who wins the game because the hobo will get the trophy either way. Ignoring the fact that two soccer teams were just played by a hobo in this example, I just pointed out in my unnecessarily long-winded story the fact that humans tend to not compete so much when they have the same ultimate goal in mind. Which is why I believe Hobbes thinks it would be best if humans had the same opinons on certain subjects.