Causes and Effects of “Diffidence” According to Thomas Hobbes

The feeling of trust has always been the source from which people drive their strength. As a baby depends on their parents, a young person on their burgeoning abilities. This faith in higher forces or the natural order itself may grow with time, fostering a hope for harmony and peace. However, what happens if this innate trust dissipates? In this analytical response, the concept of diffidence will be examined, which Hobbes wittingly presents in "Leviathan" as the source of conflict and which unwittingly mirrors the volatile times he lives in. In addition to presenting counterarguments that refute these theories, this study will look at the sources of diffidence that Hobbes identified, such as fear and competition, and their pervasive impacts on social harmony. The paper seeks to highlight Hobbes' deliberate—or perhaps inadvertent—observations regarding the vulnerability of human trust and how such insights affect world peace.

The period in which the author lived should be taken into account for a good objective perspective. Hobbes lived in a tumultuous period in European history, in around the 17th century, marked by political upheaval and religious conflict. Of course, his ideas were influenced by his time, place, and experiences, just like those of every other author in history. Therefore, Hobbes may have unwittingly brought up the social and political climate of his day when addressing this topic because his opinions on diffidence can be understood as a reflection of those circumstances. Based on Hobbes, due to the lack of self-authority, individuals constantly feel distrust, diffidence, suspicious of others, and afraid of their intentions and potential. The reason for this is Hobbes' wittingly developed theory of the state of nature, which he defines as "the war of all against all" (Hobbes), an inevitable consequence of human nature. It arises from reasons such as everyone's desire to have everything (competition), distrust of each other (diffidence), and seeing the success of others as a threat to their own success (glory). When there is a state of nature nobody can rely on the other. People always are in an alert position for potential threats from others. Human nature is simplified by that approach, especially when considering the actual world. Given our individual strengths, our differences actually serve to highlight our values and make life easier for each of us rather than posing a danger. Furthermore, it does not encompass the whole range of interactions between people in various cultural settings.

The mutual reliance among people in collectivist cultures suggests that the general sense of diffidence described by Hobbes may not always materialize. On the other hand, Hobbes's findings appear to be more in line with the focus placed in individualistic societies on personal accomplishments and autonomy. Nevertheless, even in these settings, modern institutions are essential in reducing inherent insecurity. As trust grows between organizations and individuals, "The covenants without the sword are but words and of no strength to secure a man at all"(Hobbes) is an invalid statement. As a result of this, evaluating a concept of diffidence just based on its definition and concentrating on a particular era of time is insufficient to provide a fair assessment for other times and nations.

It is clear that competition was the main driver when the causes and consequences were analyzed from a Hobbesian viewpoint. Due to the nature of humans and the need for self-preservation (which usually involves facing a threat), one of the main reasons people quarrel is diffidence (Hobbes). As it happens, diffidence is not the primary cause, despite its seeming rationale. The underlying reason for people's incessant comparing is their incapacity to recognize their own worth and identity. War often results from a lack of self-confidence and self-doubt, not from mistrust of others.

Let’s consider caterpillars and butterflies. The caterpillar will not feel comfortable if it continuously compares itself to a butterfly because it would forget that it will one day return to itself and that every stage of its existence is meaningful. Furthermore, it's not always a terrible thing to feel insecure; if people with great potential reach out to others instead of focusing on themselves, an ideal balance will be reached. Therefore, this part of what Hobbes said, "...the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" (Hobbes) will not occur. The effect of diffidence was of course the result of conflict, social disorder, and fairness in society, and all of them inhibit solidarity. Hobbes suggests that a strong central authority is necessary for this reason. Nonetheless, preventing conflict won't be possible with a powerful central government. For example, a policy developed as a result of conflict because it implies that all sides have interests, no matter how little. Therefore, politics has been a mediator between governments. However, there are still wars even though politics has served as a bridge between countries with disparate management styles. That’s why diffidence is not the main reason and analyzing its effect cannot entirely help us to get out of the state of nature.

Contrary to what Hobbes said, the issue of diffidence, feeling unsafe, and viewing others, as possible targets cannot be the main reason behind war. We still have catastrophe wars because we have governments and politicians as general authorities now. This demonstrates that while peace can only be preserved among people, strong power has not been sufficient to do it. People under strong authority systems are unable to make wise judgments if they lack self-awareness and are unable to manage themselves. Thus, they ought to address the issue of lacking self-control, desiring more, evaluating others, and believing in oneself as better. They ought to have a strong sense of civic duty. That is the only way to ensure peace.

Resource:

Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. Ed. J. C. A. Gaskin. Oxford World's Classics, n.d.