Thomas Hobbes · Complete work
Part II, Chapter XXV, 1
Part II, Chapter XXV, 1 of 101. Read it here for reference, or continue through the entire work without leaving the reader.
Open the complete readerOriginal 17th-century English
OF COUNSELL
How fallacious it is to judge of the nature of things, by the ordinary and inconstant use of words, appeareth in nothing more, than in the confusion of Counsels, and Commands, arising from the Imperative manner of speaking in them both, and in many other occasions besides. For the words “Doe this,” are the words not onely of him that Commandeth; but also of him that giveth Counsell; and of him that Exhorteth; and yet there are but few, that see not, that these are very different things; or that cannot distinguish between them, when they perceive who it is that speaketh, and to whom the Speech is directed, and upon what occasion. But finding those phrases in mens writings, and being not able, or not willing to enter into a consideration of the circumstances, they mistake sometimes the Precepts of Counsellours, for the Precepts of them that command; and sometimes the contrary; according as it best agreeth with the conclusions they would inferre, or the actions they approve. To avoyd which mistakes, and render to those termes of Commanding, Counselling, and Exhorting, their proper and distinct significations, I define them thus.
COMMAND is, where a man saith, “Doe this,” or “Doe this not,” without expecting other reason than the Will of him that sayes it. From this it followeth manifestly, that he that Commandeth, pretendeth thereby his own Benefit: For the reason of his Command is his own Will onely, and the proper object of every mans Will, is some Good to himselfe.
COUNSELL, is where a man saith, “Doe” or “Doe not this,” and deduceth his own reasons from the benefit that arriveth by it to him to whom he saith it. And from this it is evident, that he that giveth Counsell, pretendeth onely (whatsoever he intendeth) the good of him, to whom he giveth it.
Therefore between Counsell and Command, one great difference is, that Command is directed to a mans own benefit; and Counsell to the benefit of another man. And from this ariseth another difference, that a man may be obliged to do what he is Commanded; as when he hath covenanted to obey: But he cannot be obliged to do as he is Counselled, because the hurt of not following it, is his own; or if he should covenant to follow it, then is the Counsell turned into the nature of a Command. A third difference between them is, that no man can pretend a right to be of another mans Counsell; because he is not to pretend benefit by it to himselfe; but to demand right to Counsell another, argues a will to know his designes, or to gain some other Good to himselfe; which (as I said before) is of every mans will the proper object.
This also is incident to the nature of Counsell; that whatsoever it be, he that asketh it, cannot in equity accuse, or punish it: For to ask Counsell of another, is to permit him to give such Counsell as he shall think best; And consequently, he that giveth counsell to his Soveraign, (whether a Monarch, or an Assembly) when he asketh it, cannot in equity be punished for it, whether the same be conformable to the opinion of the most, or not, so it be to the Proposition in debate. For if the sense of the Assembly can be taken notice of, before the Debate be ended, they should neither ask, nor take any further Counsell; For the Sense of the Assembly, is the Resolution of the Debate, and End of all Deliberation. And generally he that demandeth Counsell, is Author of it; and therefore cannot punish it; and what the Soveraign cannot, no man else can. But if one Subject giveth Counsell to another, to do any thing contrary to the Lawes, whether that Counsell proceed from evill intention, or from ignorance onely, it is punishable by the Common-wealth; because ignorance of the Law, is no good excuse, where every man is bound to take notice of the Lawes to which he is subject.
EXHORTATION, and DEHORTATION, is Counsell, accompanied with signes in him that giveth it, of vehement desire to have it followed; or to say it more briefly, Counsell Vehemently Pressed. For he that Exhorteth, doth not deduce the consequences of what he adviseth to be done, and tye himselfe therein to the rigour of true reasoning; but encourages him he Counselleth, to Action: As he that Dehorteth, deterreth him from it. And therefore they have in their speeches, a regard to the common Passions, and opinions of men, in deducing their reasons; and make use of Similitudes, Metaphors, Examples, and other tooles of Oratory, to perswade their Hearers of the Utility, Honour, or Justice of following their advise.
From whence may be inferred, First, that Exhortation and Dehortation, is directed to the Good of him that giveth the Counsell, not of him that asketh it, which is contrary to the duty of a Counsellour; who (by the definition of Counsell) ought to regard, not his own benefits, but his whom he adviseth. And that he directeth his Counsell to his own benefit, is manifest enough, by the long and vehement urging, or by the artificial giving thereof; which being not required of him, and consequently proceeding from his own occasions, is directed principally to his own benefit, and but accidentarily to the good of him that is Counselled, or not at all.
Secondly, that the use of Exhortation and Dehortation lyeth onely, where a man is to speak to a Multitude; because when the Speech is addressed to one, he may interrupt him, and examine his reasons more rigorously, than can be done in a Multitude; which are too many to enter into Dispute, and Dialogue with him that speaketh indifferently to them all at once. Thirdly, that they that Exhort and Dehort, where they are required to give Counsell, are corrupt Counsellours, and as it were bribed by their own interest. For though the Counsell they give be never so good; yet he that gives it, is no more a good Counsellour, than he that giveth a Just Sentence for a reward, is a just Judge. But where a man may lawfully Command, as a Father in his Family, or a Leader in an Army, his Exhortations and Dehortations, are not onely lawfull, but also necessary, and laudable: But then they are no more Counsells, but Commands; which when they are for Execution of soure labour; sometimes necessity, and alwayes humanity requireth to be sweetned in the delivery, by encouragement, and in the tune and phrase of Counsell, rather then in harsher language of Command.
Examples of the difference between Command and Counsell, we may take from the formes of Speech that expresse them in Holy Scripture. “Have no other Gods but me; Make to thy selfe no graven Image; Take not Gods name in vain; Sanctifie the Sabbath; Honour thy Parents; Kill not; Steale not,” &c. are Commands; because the reason for which we are to obey them, is drawn from the will of God our King, whom we are obliged to obey. But these words, “Sell all thou hast; give it to the poore; and follow me,” are Counsell; because the reason for which we are to do so, is drawn from our own benefit; which is this, that we shall have “Treasure in Heaven.” These words, “Go into the village over against you, and you shall find an Asse tyed, and her Colt; loose her, and bring her to me,” are a Command: for the reason of their fact is drawn from the will of their Master: but these words, “Repent, and be Baptized in the Name of Jesus,” are Counsell; because the reason why we should so do, tendeth not to any benefit of God Almighty, who shall still be King in what manner soever we rebell; but of our selves, who have no other means of avoyding the punishment hanging over us for our sins.
Musean translation
Mouseia’s complete machine-assisted Musean translation, made directly from the complete 1651 English text (introduction, forty-seven chapters, review and conclusion) for fidelity, the author’s force and cadence, and modern clarity. Hobbes’s marginal summaries are omitted.
OF COUNSEL
How deceptive it is to judge the nature of things by ordinary, changeable usage is nowhere more apparent than in the confusion of counsel with command. Both use the imperative, as do other forms of speech. For “Do this” may be spoken not only by one who commands, but by one who gives counsel or exhorts. Yet few people fail to see that these are very different things, or cannot distinguish them when they know who speaks, to whom, and on what occasion. But when people encounter these expressions in writing and cannot, or will not, consider their circumstances, they sometimes mistake the precepts of counselors for those of commanders, and sometimes the reverse, according to which mistake best suits the conclusions they wish to draw or the actions they approve. To prevent such mistakes and give commanding, counseling, and exhorting their proper, distinct meanings, I define them as follows.
A COMMAND is given when someone says, “Do this,” or “Do not do this,” expecting no reason for obedience beyond the will of the speaker. It follows plainly that whoever commands thereby seeks his own benefit: the reason for the command is his will alone, and the proper object of every man’s will is some good for himself.
COUNSEL is given when someone says, “Do this,” or “Do not do this,” and draws his reasons from the benefit it will bring to the person addressed. Plainly, then, whoever gives counsel professes to seek only the good of the person he counsels, whatever his actual intentions.
One great difference between counsel and command, then, is that command is directed toward the speaker’s benefit, counsel toward another’s. From this arises another difference: a man may be obliged to do what he is commanded, as when he has made a Covenant to obey; but he cannot be obliged to do as he is counseled, since the harm of disregarding it is his own. If he makes a Covenant to follow it, the counsel takes on the nature of a command. A third difference is that no man can claim a right to serve as another’s counselor, since he is not entitled to seek his own benefit by it. To claim a right to counsel another shows a desire to learn his plans or secure some other good for oneself—and that, as I said, is the proper object of every man’s will.
It is also inherent in counsel that the person who asks for it cannot justly accuse or punish the counsel he receives. To ask another’s counsel is to permit him to offer what he thinks best. Consequently, a person who gives counsel at the request of his Soveraigne, whether monarch or assembly, cannot justly be punished for it, whether it accords with the majority’s opinion or not, so long as it addresses the proposal under debate. For if the assembly’s judgment can be known before the debate is over, no further counsel should be sought or heard: the assembly’s judgment is the resolution of the debate and the end of deliberation. More generally, whoever asks for counsel is its author and therefore cannot punish it; and no one else can do what the Soveraigne cannot. But if one subject counsels another to do something contrary to the laws, that counsel is punishable by the Common-wealth, whether it springs from ill intent or mere ignorance: ignorance of the law is no good excuse where everyone is bound to know the laws to which he is subject.
EXHORTATION and DISSUASION are counsel accompanied by signs of the counselor’s vehement desire that it be followed—or, more briefly, counsel pressed vehemently. A person who exhorts does not trace the consequences of his advice and bind himself to the rigor of sound reasoning; he spurs the person he counsels to action, just as one who dissuades deters him from it. In setting out their reasons, therefore, such speakers appeal to common Passions and opinions, employing comparisons, metaphors, examples, and other tools of oratory to persuade their hearers that following their advice is useful, honorable, or just.
From this we may infer, first, that exhortation and dissuasion are directed to the good of the person giving the counsel, not of the person asking for it. This is contrary to the duty of a counselor, who, by the definition of counsel, must consider the benefit of the person he advises, not his own. That the speaker directs it toward his own benefit is evident in his long and vehement insistence or his artful presentation: these were not asked of him, and thus arise from his own needs; they are chiefly for his own benefit, and only incidentally, if at all, for the good of the person counseled.
Second, exhortation and dissuasion are useful only when speaking to a multitude. A single listener can interrupt and examine a speaker’s reasons more rigorously than a multitude can, since its members are too numerous to debate or converse with someone addressing all of them at once. Third, those who exhort or dissuade when asked to give counsel are corrupt counselors, bribed, as it were, by their own interests. However good their counsel, its giver is no more a good counselor than someone who gives a just verdict for a reward is a just judge. Yet when a man may lawfully command, as a father in his family or a leader in an army may, his exhortations and dissuasions are not only lawful but necessary and praiseworthy. They are then no longer counsel but commands. When commands call for the performance of harsh labor, necessity sometimes, and humanity always, requires them to be softened by encouragement and delivered in the tone and language of counsel rather than in the harsher language of command.
Examples of the difference between command and counsel may be taken from the forms of speech found in Holy Scripture. “Have no other gods but me; make no graven image for yourself; do not take God’s name in vain; keep the Sabbath holy; honor your parents; do not kill; do not steal,” and so forth, are commands, because the reason for obeying them is the will of God our King, whom we are obliged to obey. But the words “Sell all you have, give it to the poor, and follow me” are counsel, because the reason for doing so is our own benefit: we shall have “treasure in heaven.” The words “Go to the village opposite you, and you will find a donkey tied there, with her colt; untie her and bring her to me” are a command, because the reason for the act is their master’s will. But “Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus” is counsel, because the reason for doing it is not any benefit to God Almighty, who remains King however we rebel, but our own benefit: we have no other means of avoiding the punishment that hangs over us for our sins.
Plain English translation
Mouseia’s complete Plain English edition, made independently and directly from the complete 1651 English text (introduction, forty-seven chapters, review and conclusion). Hobbes’s marginal summaries are omitted.
On counsel
Ordinary and shifting uses of words can mislead us about the nature of things. Nowhere is this clearer than in the confusion between advice and commands. Both use the imperative form, as do many other kinds of speech. “Do this” may be said by someone giving a command, giving advice, or urging someone on. Few people fail to see that these are very different acts when they know who is speaking, to whom, and in what situation. Yet readers sometimes find these phrases in books and either cannot or will not consider the circumstances. They mistake a counselor's instructions for commands, or commands for a counselor's instructions, whichever suits the conclusions they want to draw or the actions they favor. To prevent these mistakes and distinguish commanding, advising, and urging, I define them as follows.
A command is when a person says, “Do this” or “Do not do this,” and gives no reason beyond that person's own will. Clearly, someone who commands claims a benefit for themselves. The only reason for the command is that person's will, and everyone wills some good for themselves.
Advice is when a person says, “Do this” or “Do not do this,” and gives reasons based on the benefit to the person addressed. Clearly, someone who gives advice claims to be seeking only the good of the person advised, whatever their actual intentions.
One major difference is that a command serves the speaker's benefit, while advice serves another person's. A second difference follows: someone can be obligated to do what they are commanded, for example when they have made a Covenant to obey. They cannot be obligated to do what they are advised, because they alone bear the harm if they ignore it. If they make a Covenant to follow the advice, however, it becomes a command. A third difference is that no one can claim a right to advise another person. A counselor is not supposed to claim a personal benefit. Demanding such a right suggests a wish to learn the other person's plans or gain some other benefit for oneself. As I said, this is what everyone naturally seeks.
There is something else about advice: whoever asks for it cannot fairly accuse or punish the person who gives it, whatever the advice may be. Asking someone for advice means allowing them to say what they think best. A person who advises the sovereign, whether monarch or assembly, at the sovereign's request therefore cannot fairly be punished for that advice. This holds whether or not it agrees with the majority's opinion, so long as it concerns the question under debate. If the assembly's view were known before the debate ended, its members should neither ask for nor receive more advice. The assembly's view is the decision that ends the debate and all deliberation. Generally, whoever requests advice is its author and therefore cannot punish it. No one else can punish what the sovereign cannot. But when one subject advises another to break the law, the commonwealth may punish that advice, whether it came from bad intentions or simple ignorance. Ignorance of the law is no good excuse when everyone is required to know the laws they live under.
Urging and discouraging are forms of advice accompanied by signs that the speaker strongly wants the advice followed. In short, they are advice pressed forcefully. Someone urging an action does not work through its consequences by strict, sound reasoning. Instead, the speaker encourages the listener to act, while someone discouraging an action tries to hold the listener back. Their arguments appeal to common passions and opinions. They use comparisons, metaphors, examples, and other tools of persuasion to convince listeners that following their advice is useful, honorable, or just.
Several things follow. First, urging or discouraging someone serves the good of the person giving advice, not the person asking for it. This goes against a counselor's duty, which by definition is to consider the other person's benefit rather than their own. The speaker's personal aim is clear from the long and forceful pressure, or from the artful way the advice is given. No one asked for this effort, so it comes from the speaker's own concerns. It primarily serves the speaker, and serves the listener only incidentally, if at all.
Second, urging and discouraging are useful only when speaking to a crowd. A single listener can interrupt and examine the speaker's reasons more closely. A crowd has too many people to debate one by one with someone speaking to everyone at once. Third, people asked to give advice who instead urge or discourage are corrupt counselors, as though bribed by their own interests. Their advice may be excellent. But they are no more good counselors than someone who gives a just verdict in exchange for payment is a just judge. Where someone may lawfully command, however, as a parent in a family or a commander in an army may, urging and discouraging are lawful, necessary, and praiseworthy. They are then not advice but commands. When such commands require difficult labor, necessity sometimes, and humanity always, call for encouragement and the gentler tone and wording of advice instead of harsh commands.
Scripture offers examples of the difference between commands and advice. “Have no other gods but me; make no carved image for yourself; do not take God's name in vain; keep the Sabbath holy; honor your parents; do not kill; do not steal,” and so on are commands. We obey them because God, our King, wills it, and we are obliged to obey him. But “Sell all you have; give it to the poor; and follow me” is advice. Its reason lies in our own benefit: we will have “treasure in Heaven.” “Go to the village across from you, and you will find a donkey tied up with her colt; untie her and bring her to me” is a command, because their reason for acting is their master's will. But “Repent, and be baptized in the name of Jesus” is advice. God Almighty gains nothing from our doing so; he remains King however we rebel. We benefit, because we have no other way to escape the punishment awaiting us for our sins.