Where there is no common power, there is no law; whereno law, no injustice. Force and fraud are in war the two cardinal virtues. Justiceand injustice are none of the faculties neither of the body nor mind. If they were,they might be in a man that were alone in the world, as well as his senses andpassions

No more are the actions that proceedfrom those passions, till they know a law that forbids them; which, till laws bemade, they cannot know, nor can any law be made till they have agreed uponthe person that shall make it

In such condition there is no place for industry, because thefruit thereof is uncertain, and consequently no culture of the earth, no navigationnor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea, no commodiousbuilding, no instruments of moving and removing such things as require muchforce, no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time, no arts, noletters, no society, and, which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violentdeath, and the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

So that in the nature of man we find three principal causes of quarrel. First,competition; secondly, diffidence; thirdly, glory

Again, men have no pleasure, but on the contrary a great deal of grief, inkeeping company where there is no power able to overawe them all

And by consequence, such augmentation of dominion over men beingnecessary to a man’s conservation, it ought to be allowed him.

nd therefore, if any two men desire the same thing which nevertheless theycannot both enjoy, they become enemies; and, in the way to their end, which isprincipally their own conservation and sometimes their delectation only,endeavour to destroy or subdue one another.

howsoever theymay acknowledge many others to be more witty or more eloquent or morelearned, yet they will hardly believe there be many so wise as themselves, forthey see their own wit at hand and other men’s at a distance.

Forprudence is but experience, which equal time equally bestows on all men inthose things they equally apply themselves unto.

As a result, their neighbour is for them not only a potential helper or sexualobject, but also someone who tempts them to satisfy their aggressiveness on him, to exploit his capacityfor work without compensation, to use him sexually without his consent, to seize his possessions, tohumiliate him, to cause him pain, to torture and to kill him

When a love-relationship is at its height there is no room left for any interest in theenvironment; a pair of lovers are sufficient to themselves, and do not even need the child they have incommon to make them happy.

We said there that man's discovery that sexual (genital)love afforded him the strongest experiences of satisfaction, and in fact provided him with the prototypeof all happiness, must have suggested to him that he should continue to seek the satisfaction ofhappiness in his life along the path of sexual relations and that he should make genital erotism thecentral point of his life

When this happened, themale acquired a motive for keeping the female, or, speaking more generally, his sexual objects, nearhim; while the female, who did not want to be separated from her helpless young, was obliged, in theirinterests, to remain with the stronger male.

Man has, as it were,become a kind of prosthetic God.

Happiness, however, is something essentially subjective

but it is very difficult to forman opinion whether and in what degree men of an earlier age felt happier and what part their culturalconditions played in the matter.

And, finally,what good to us is a long life if it is difficult and barren of joys, and if it is so full of misery that we canonly welcome death as a deliverer?

It wasdiscovered that a person becomes neurotic because he cannot tolerate the amount of frustration whichsociety imposes on him in the service of its cultural ideals, and it was inferred from this that theabolition or reduction of those demands would result in a return to possibilities of happiness.

I callthis contention astonishing because, in whatever way we may define the concept of civilization, it is acertain fact that all the things with which we seek to protect ourselves against the threats that emanatefrom the sources of suffering are part of that very civilization

But "highly visible" social groups such as Blacks or women are differentfrom aggregates, or mere "combinations of people" (see French, 1975; Friedman and May, 1985; May, 1987, chap. 1). A social group is defined not primarily by a set of shared attributes, but by a sense of identity.What definesBlack Americans as a social group is not primarily their skin color; some persons whose skin coior is fairly light, for example, identify themselves as Black.Though sometimes objective attributes are a necessary condition for classifying oneself or others as belonging to a certain social group, it is identificationwith a certain social status, the common histor y that social status produces,and self-identification that define the group as a group

incommensurat