Debunking the myth about Hobbes’ Leviathan

I’ve been looking for an issue to write about, and have thus dove into my notes from a political theory class I took a few years ago.  The issue I want to tackle is the myth that Thomas Hobbes’ book Leviathan is pessimistic.   The main reason that some have reached this conclusion is the most often quoted passage from the book.  The section is in Chapter 13 and describes “the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”, an existence that happens in the state of nature. 

The State of Nature according to Hobbes is an existence for humans in which there is nothing good (no civilization or culture) and no leisure to produce anything because all time is spent in continual fear of violent death.  The State of Nature is a state of war in which all men are at war with all other men because there is no government above all to regulate behavior and there is no gurantee of peace/security.  Within the State of Nature men are governed by their passions and desires and constantly attempt to outdue their fellows over goods and materials.  The State of Nature can only be escaped when a recognized government exists over all and a gurantee of peace and personal security exists.  To that end people I(according to Hobbes) should agree to create a government headed by a Sovereign who wields power, agreeing to give up some of their rights in exchange for a gurantee of personal security. 

Now a decent reading of Leviathan clearing shows that Hobbes is using the worst case scenario of human existence to make existence under a government more appealing (it also can be taken as a metaphor for civil war, as Hobbes was writing during the English Civil War in the 17th century).  The Commonwealth (govt) he advocates is quite liberal (with a Sovereign who is benevolent) and which is meant to be a far better existence that allows people to live safely and be productive.  But a glance at Leviathan by some people only look at the State of Nature description as an example that the book is pessimistic.  Not so much in reality, as the book appeals to the ability of humans to reason to realize that coming together to create a government that will exist to protect themselves and each other from the worst elements of society.