![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm not quite sure about the quote that constitutes the title of this page. What would it mean if you translated it literally, or, to be more precise, what kind of ellipsis is that?
As far as I know, Hobbes has been mentioned in connexion with the phrase Bellum omnium contra omnes rather than the cryptic Bellum omnia omnes. What is it I fail to see here? -- KF 20:13, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Now that we've got the wrong title in the Portuguese Wikipedia as well I repeat my question.
I would also like to point out that we are perpetuating a silly mistake here as several others have plagiarized the article (although this is of course not our problem, and you can get some nice ideas reading the Nihilartikel article):
Only in the discussion forum that ponders the question whether Wal-Mart can be seen as Leviathan ( http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/29591 ) does a user who calls him/herself the fire you left me say on November 14, 2003:
Regarding the title, the correct reference would be 'bellum omnium contra omnes.' posted by the fire you left me at 3:54 PM PST on November 14.
To sum up, I think it is time we did something about that title (now that we have fooled the others). But I still think the fire you left me and I might be mistaken because all the rest are quiet. Could we have some support, please? <KF> 20:41, 3 May 2004 (UTC)
Looks like this is fixed here. Ken K. Smith (a.k.a. User:Thin Smek) ( talk) 07:01, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
Should have whatever the tag is for that. 72.228.177.92 ( talk) 00:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, the german page is better. It uses a longer quote, which provides a better context for the quote within Hobbes own ideas. And it helps clarify what Hobbes means by the idea. We should expand our version similarly. -- William M. Connolley ( talk) 07:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
There must be notable critics. I'm sure someone has built upon the rational animal supposition and argued that any action could be constituted as a social action. IMHO, the term nature often gets thrown around like "free market", often supposing it to be an invisible "hand". The idea law strictly starts with "a war each one against each other" lacks any notion that ethics are intrinsic to neurons. I'll stop there in fear of soapboxing, much against the wp:guidelines. Eaterjolly ( talk) 12:06, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
I don't know if anybody ever critiziced Hobbes for his "Bellum omnium contra omnes" but iot is a stupid idea! However one thinks the beginning of the human race, it is clear that at the beginning families must stand (because of the unruled intercourse and the following uncertainty of the father under mother law), because of that a family order and therefore no war. 80.133.245.25 ( talk) 17:53, 19 October 2018 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I'm not quite sure about the quote that constitutes the title of this page. What would it mean if you translated it literally, or, to be more precise, what kind of ellipsis is that?
As far as I know, Hobbes has been mentioned in connexion with the phrase Bellum omnium contra omnes rather than the cryptic Bellum omnia omnes. What is it I fail to see here? -- KF 20:13, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Now that we've got the wrong title in the Portuguese Wikipedia as well I repeat my question.
I would also like to point out that we are perpetuating a silly mistake here as several others have plagiarized the article (although this is of course not our problem, and you can get some nice ideas reading the Nihilartikel article):
Only in the discussion forum that ponders the question whether Wal-Mart can be seen as Leviathan ( http://www.metafilter.com/mefi/29591 ) does a user who calls him/herself the fire you left me say on November 14, 2003:
Regarding the title, the correct reference would be 'bellum omnium contra omnes.' posted by the fire you left me at 3:54 PM PST on November 14.
To sum up, I think it is time we did something about that title (now that we have fooled the others). But I still think the fire you left me and I might be mistaken because all the rest are quiet. Could we have some support, please? <KF> 20:41, 3 May 2004 (UTC)
Looks like this is fixed here. Ken K. Smith (a.k.a. User:Thin Smek) ( talk) 07:01, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
Should have whatever the tag is for that. 72.228.177.92 ( talk) 00:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Yes, the german page is better. It uses a longer quote, which provides a better context for the quote within Hobbes own ideas. And it helps clarify what Hobbes means by the idea. We should expand our version similarly. -- William M. Connolley ( talk) 07:35, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
There must be notable critics. I'm sure someone has built upon the rational animal supposition and argued that any action could be constituted as a social action. IMHO, the term nature often gets thrown around like "free market", often supposing it to be an invisible "hand". The idea law strictly starts with "a war each one against each other" lacks any notion that ethics are intrinsic to neurons. I'll stop there in fear of soapboxing, much against the wp:guidelines. Eaterjolly ( talk) 12:06, 28 March 2018 (UTC)
I don't know if anybody ever critiziced Hobbes for his "Bellum omnium contra omnes" but iot is a stupid idea! However one thinks the beginning of the human race, it is clear that at the beginning families must stand (because of the unruled intercourse and the following uncertainty of the father under mother law), because of that a family order and therefore no war. 80.133.245.25 ( talk) 17:53, 19 October 2018 (UTC)