Within his text, Of the Natural Condition of Humankind as Concerning Their Felicity, and Misery, Thomas Hobbes attempts to discover how the absolutes of justice and injustice differ between the individual and the individual within the societal state. Of the relation between just and unjust, morally right or wrong, Hobbes allows neither to take precedence in his view of human nature—asserting that outside of common governing there is no natural form of justice. His stance is clearly that the nature of man is equal, and composed of three definite causes of conflict: “First, competition; secondly, diffidence; thirdly, glory.” He likens the composition of these states in mankind to a perpetual war of “every man, against every man,” in which the life of men outside of a governed society is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” Hobbes goes on to ascertain the true nature of man’s acquiescence towards governance; that governance brings the faculties of justice and injustice, as well as an end to man’s utter equality.
For Hobbes, equality in competition relates to ones ability to will ones intention. When Hobbes relates the relative size of any two men—that one may be stronger but the other quicker, he clearly points that though the stronger can kill the weaker through force, “the weakest has strength enough to kill the strongest, either by secret machinations, or by confederacy with others.” Physical competition is equally advantageous to both men of strength who lack cunning, and men of cunning who lack strength; so it can be expected that if a man labours for a position of more convenience, or higher esteem than his fellows, “others may probably be expected to come prepared with forces united, to dispossess, and deprive him.” Likewise, the depriver should be deprived of his glory under the same conditions. Equally balanced too is the inequality with which men view each other.
Hobbes outlines a principle within men that causes them to believe in their individual superiority over the rest. He reasons that all men may “acknowledge many others to be more witty, or more eloquent, or more learned; yet they will hardly believe there be many so wise as themselves.” Hobbes shows that man is equal in wit and intellect, and if one thinks he stands out “[it] is but a vain conceit of [his] own wisdom.” The concept of inequality among intellects is a construct of the inner minds of men, “for they see their own wit at hand, and other men’s at a distance.” This does not disprove men’s equality with each other for Hobbes; rather it points out to him that all men are endowed with the same smug superiority, “for there is not ordinarily a greater sign of the equal distribution of any thing, than that every man is contented with his share.” Content wanes when self-doubt arises.
Diffidence between men is usual where there is no common governing force, or “no power able to over-awe them all.” Hobbes can see this lack of confidence within the workings of man’s mind. In the same manner that every man values his wit and intellect before any other, so “every man looketh that his companion[s] should value him, at the same rate he sets upon himself.” The impossibility of this scenario puts men in an awkward state which, “amongst them that have no common power to keep them in quiet, is far enough to make them destroy each other.” Grief and war within friendships are evident to Hobbes, who sees that war “consisteth not in actual fighting … but in the known disposition thereto.” Hobbes’ idea of common power is governance, and without such dominion there can be only open war that festers within inaction.
Of governance, Hobbes states that without it there can be no industry, “because the fruit thereof is uncertain.” Likewise, he states there can be no “culture of the earth; no navigation, nor use of the commodities that may be imported by sea; … no knowledge of the face of the earth; no account of time; no arts; no letters; no society.” Every facet of individuality that sets mankind apart as a species would simply not be for Hobbes, without governance. This primitive existence is likened to a state of “continual fear, and danger of violent death,” but it is also a state in which Hobbes says: “The desires, and other passions of man, are in themselves no sin.” Without a governing leader, there will be no laws in place to restrict the actions taken through the passions of men; so right and wrong have no place “nor can any law be made, till [men] have agreed upon the person that shall make it.”
The implications of Hobbes’ reasoning are sharp—that “justice [ ] and injustice are none of the faculties neither of the body, nor mind.” Man does not possess the faculties of justice; rather, “they are qualities [ ] that relate to men in society, not in solitude.” Hobbes believes that men are only inclined to peace by “fear of death; desire of such things as are necessary to commodious living; and a hope by their industry to obtain them.” This orientation goes together with man’s acceptance of a government that affects his state of war against every man: bringing peace.

Whatsoever therefore is consequent to a time of war … the same is consequent to the time [ ] wherein men live without other security, than what their own strength, and their own invention shall furnish them withal … All other time is peace.

For Hobbes, peace is equivalent to governance by a common authority that sets a standard of justice and morality, and allows for men to pursue their desires in peace. Being equal and at war is the natural state of man for Hobbes. Peace comes only with assumed inequality; where men can justly elevate themselves to an unnatural comfort, as through their own labour and the security of their common government will allow.