I don't necessarily agree with this but partially agree on a logic standpoint. While gif her tis no law, then injustice would not occur. However, if there is no laws how is the society to function.

it hard to make a government peaceful as rules and regulations need to be put in place. Is Hobbes trying to say that no form of government is better and more peaceful as wars would not occur?

I agree with everyone's interpretation as I do believe this exactly describes a men's thinking. However, I would like to add that this plays a role in masculinity. No man would want to be seen weak or not powerful s that s what society has made them not to be. This is why they resort to this, but sometimes it's okay to exhibit these traits to a certain extent. I don't believe men resort to being powerful or violence first, but more like they are able to provide and show leadership.

AS Hobbes says, it is important to surround yourself with people who value you. However, this reminds of how I was always told to surround yourself with individuals who are great or better. This is because it will keep you motivated to also be great; it's like admiring a mentor for example. It is important to not get treated poorly also!

This is true as one gets jealous of the other. I have seen may relationships ruined because of this

humans can sometime be the root of their own problems as they compare themselves to those around them. Hobbes is saying that it is human nature to compare yourself to someone else thinking you do not have the traits they have, when in reality you do. In the end, Hobbes describe how he believe that is everyone was content with what they have, equality would exist. This is interesting as I do believe it's true. NO matter what, nothing will ever be enough for someone even if they have everything. If humans are content in what do have, there would be no joy taken from them

now some men can describe the difference between being comfortable in their own masculinity and toxic masculinity .

The way I view this is sometimes relationships can be perfect but there will always be something that is not enough. that why they fill their sexual desires with someone else as they feel like they aren't receiving enough. It also affects friendships bc people began to distant. Freud talks about a restriction upon sexual life, however that isn't possible.

extreme unwillingness to spend money or use resources

I dont get what he is trying to say here. I also don't see how liberty of an individual is no gift of civilization.

I don't think this is a useless thing. He does say its beauty however, it sounds like he doesn't necessarily agree that it's a beautiful thing. These beauties show personality of a individual which is beauty within it self

here he is comparing man to God as some believe GOD created everything. The inventions made by man through science seems like a dream to those of past generations, however I feel like that is the point as generations would look to improve rather than stay the same. It may make someone feel like a God whoever made it, but you will never feel fulfilled as humans will always try find other ways to improve.

cheap enjoyment sounds like he is saying short time enjoyment; something that doesn't last long and we cut to it in the fasts way possible. I dont agree with calling all the medical and technical advances we had "cheap enjoyment" as it's clear that it has brought many individuals happiness.

bringing someone under control

mental conditions

I feel like we would not be happier if we went back to primitive conditions. This is inly because change is important and as we learn to adapt, new things are made that make life easier.

this paragraph explains why humans suffer and I partly agree with what Freud is trying to say. However, sometimes suffering can be brought upon ourselves rather than a outside reasoning. It interesting to see that he believes suffering comes from a "weak body" but that can sometime not be what we wish.

can violence be a form of oppression based on the purpose behind the violence? the text say violence is usually directed towards a group just because an individual is associated with that group. Even individuals who don't associate with a particular group but look the part still lives in fear of being oppressed and attacked.

liberalism: willingness to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from one's own; openness to new ideas.

"the central insight expressed in the concept of exploitation is that this oppression occurs through a steady process of the transfer of the results of this labor of one social group to benefit another " - I agree with this as oppression can result from exploitation. there are many shows that show this type of exploitation when maids and assistants are treated horribly from the people with higher powers. This is because once an individual knows they have power, it gets to their head. Wealth is the root of a lot problems

how are Roman Catholics no longer oppressed as some can argue they still are? is there other conditions outside the five being talked about?

this is interesting way to put oppression. while I do agree it is based on group, i partially feel like that just not it as people individually can be oppressed. Removing the group is difficult and some people may not associate with a "group" and still be oppressed

likely to arouse or incur resentment or anger in others

in a way that relates to the method used for doing, teaching, or studying something (Cambridge dictionary )

this paragraph reminds me of the saying you are who you surround yourself with or you are made up of the five people your surround yourself with. like the paragraph says, the environment in which an individuals grows up in affects how they turn out. It doesn't mean the individuals doesn't has an idea of who they are, but more they belong to a "group" that they are used to. For example, if you were raised in a household where your parents are strict and always made decisions for you, you can grow up and feel naive like you can't make choices for yourself because you feel the need of approval

"oppression is the evil perpetrated by the Others" This statement is eye-opening. This line clearly shows that oppression does not have to be the domination of one group over another. Instead, it's more of humans feeling the power to degrade other to make them better; oppress them to make them feel little

All the groups she mention like she said are clearly not pressed in the same manner as one can be worst than the other. However, she goes on to say that not one criteria can fit them all. I would like to see how she ends up defining oppression and whether those five categories fit for all groups.