War of all against all as the ultimate health inducing stress test.
"A grotesque recalibration of Hobbes, isn't it? They've taken bellum omnium contra omnes—a warning against anarchy—and reframed it as a wellness regime. In their dystopian calculus, conflict isn’t breakdown, it’s detox. The premise is as seductive as it is sinister: survival itself becomes proof of moral and biological superiority, and cooperation is rebranded as weakness, stagnation, or even indulgent self-deceit."
"It’s the gymification of genocide. The ideological equivalent of saying, 'If you didn’t endure the crucible, you weren’t meant to be part of the future.' The winners get framed as the spiritually exfoliated elite—shedding the excess fat of mercy, nuance, and empathy."
"What’s chilling is how this logic seduces even the rebels. Resistance movements may mirror its logic, turning liberation into purification. Justice becomes selective endurance."
"In your mythic architecture, this feels like a world governed by The Cult of Friction—an institution whose holy texts are pressure gauges and whose saints are survivors of orchestrated collapse. Perhaps Ultraman becomes the heretic here, not by defeating chaos, but by surviving without submitting to its terms. A champion who refuses the premise that destruction is a cleansing force."
How do you think Hobbes would view today's world?
"If Hobbes were to peer into today’s world, I think he’d be both vindicated and unsettled.
π Vindicated because:
- The persistence of strong centralized states would affirm his belief that only a powerful sovereign can prevent society from descending into chaos. The modern state's ability to enforce laws, maintain order, and suppress civil unrest would seem like proof that Leviathan still reigns.
- The prevalence of social contracts—whether in democratic constitutions or digital terms of service—would echo his idea that individuals surrender certain freedoms for collective security."
"π¬ Unsettled because:
- The fragmentation of authority—through social media, decentralized movements, and globalized power structures—might look to him like a slow erosion of sovereignty. Hobbes feared divided loyalties and competing claims to legitimacy, and today’s world is full of them.
- The rise of individual rights and moral pluralism could challenge his assumption that peace requires obedience to a singular, unaccountable authority. He might see modern liberal democracies as dangerously fragile experiments in balancing freedom with order."
"In short, Hobbes might say: 'You’ve built Leviathans, but you’ve also given them mirrors and microphones. Now everyone wants to be sovereign.'”
"Would you like to explore how Hobbesian logic could be dramatized in a mythic narrative—perhaps a society where the Leviathan is both protector and prisoner of its own people? That could be a compelling twist."
https://thehistoryace.com/thomas-hobbes-his-2-major-influences-upon-modern-society/
https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2022/01/how-thomas-hobbes-shapes-modern-politics
So in Hobbes' Universe, the Sovereign has the moral leeway to behave abominably.
"In a word—yes, disturbingly so."
"Hobbes viewed the sovereign not through the lens of virtue, but necessity. In Leviathan, he argues that the sovereign's authority arises from a collective pact: individuals surrender their rights to one ruler (or ruling body) to escape the violent chaos of the 'state of nature.' Once that transfer is made, the sovereign isn't bound by the same moral constraints as subjects. Their primary duty isn’t to be good—it’s to preserve peace and prevent collapse."
"π Key implications in Hobbes' framework:
- No accountability from below: Subjects can't justly rebel unless the sovereign fails to maintain basic order. Even cruelty is tolerable if it keeps civil war at bay.
- Justice flows from the sovereign: There’s no objective standard—whatever the sovereign decrees becomes law. Moral legitimacy is absorbed into political necessity.
- The ends justify the means: If atrocity is what deters greater violence, it’s not just permissible—it’s rational."
"This isn't to say Hobbes applauded tyrants, but he feared instability more than despotism. In essence, he'd tolerate an abominable ruler if the alternative was returning to a world where everyone could be killed at any moment by anyone for any reason."
"In a mythic framework, the Hobbesian sovereign might resemble a Shadow Shepherd—one who guards the flock through threat, silence, and occasional sacrifice. Peace isn’t harmonic; it’s hostage to power. Perhaps Ultraman enters this world not as a challenger of force, but as a revealer of alternative orders: ones built not on fear, but trust."
How could citizens cultivate self-control in such a system?
"In a Hobbesian system—where peace is maintained by a powerful, potentially unaccountable sovereign—self-control becomes both a quiet rebellion and a survival tool. Citizens aren’t empowered by democratic virtue or mutual recognition; they’re governed by fear and necessity. Yet even in such conditions, cultivating inner discipline can be a form of resistance, resilience, and subversion."
"π§ Intellectual Discipline
- Citizens might turn to philosophy, history, and narrative as ways to understand the system and themselves. Reading becomes an act of self-sharpening, a way to preserve autonomy of thought even when external freedoms are restricted.
- Myth, particularly subversive myth, could be a key—stories that offer alternative orders, that map worlds not ruled by Leviathan, nurturing mental escape hatches and moral clarity."
"π―️ Emotional Regulation Without Suppression
- In an environment of surveillance or fear, emotional control is crucial. But it doesn’t mean repression—it might mean finding covert ways to express solidarity, grief, or joy.
- Rituals (small and personal) could help—lighting a candle, writing a poem, whispering a forbidden name. These become sacred acts of continuity, memory, and resistance."
"π§ Moral Reflexivity
- Citizens can cultivate an internal compass not grounded in external law but in empathy, reflection, and ancestral wisdom.
- Ethics becomes interior: asking not 'what will I be punished for?' but 'what kind of person do I choose to be in silence?'”
"π Role Mastery
- Navigating Hobbes’ world often means playing a role—appearing obedient while nurturing quiet defiance. That requires both self-control and performative skill. The citizen becomes both actor and author of their dignity."
"This kind of self-control doesn’t aim to overthrow Leviathan—but to outlast it. It is mythic endurance, spiritual sovereignty. Perhaps in your narrative world, these quiet rebels form a network—the Order of the Unruled—an underground fellowship not of swords and sabotage, but of memory, story, and restraint."
Do you think the Leviathan would execute Epictetus?
"In Hobbes’ universe? It’s a fascinating clash of paradigms."
"Epictetus, the Stoic slave-turned-philosopher, preached inner freedom, moral autonomy, and the radical idea that true power lies in self-mastery, not domination. That’s a direct affront to the Hobbesian Leviathan, whose legitimacy rests on external control, obedience, and the suppression of chaos through centralized authority."
"π Would Leviathan execute him?
"Not necessarily for his teachings alone—but if Epictetus inspired dissent, questioned the sovereign’s moral authority, or encouraged citizens to find sovereignty within themselves, then yes, Leviathan might see him as a threat. Not because he wielded weapons, but because he wielded ideas that made people ungovernable in spirit."
"In Hobbes’ logic, the sovereign must preserve order at all costs. If Epictetus’ philosophy undermined that order—even subtly—he could be silenced. Not for treason, but for teaching people how to be free without permission."
"π Mythic twist?
"Imagine a scene where Epictetus is summoned before the Leviathan—not to be executed, but interrogated. The sovereign demands: 'What use is your freedom if it cannot prevent war?' And Epictetus replies: 'What use is your power if it cannot grant peace?'”
"Would you like to sketch that dialogue? It could be a stunning moment of philosophical brinkmanship."
Rome was sacked by Barbarians.
