Laws of Nature

Abstract

Hobbes distinguishes rational theorems from proper laws, yet both are constituted of the same precepts. The distinction cannot be merely epistemological, explaining the justification of the precepts from two standpoints. A thorough normative analysis reveals that the rational theorems have a conditional form and constitute what Hobbes calls counsel, making their normativity a kind of rational justification. The proper laws are categorical and, as law, constitute command, making their normativity obligation. The normative scope of the proper laws is generally narrower than that of the rational theorems.