He builds his argument up from definitions, but the definitions are his own. What exactly does he mean by 'natural laws'? He says that the first natural law is that a person has the right to life, and the right to defend that right. He also says that you must not disobey the sovereign. Yet 'In the making of a Common-wealth, every man giveth away the right of defending another; but not of defending himself.'
So if a monarch or dictator threatens someones life, or means of living, it is possible to disobey. Presumably, if enough people disobey, the monarch loses power. I was thinking that his view of society is very similar to a lot of Islamic societies.

"that everyman has the right to do anything he liketh". Here is my thought he says we reliquish our rights to the commonwealth, but seems to say that since we had a right to do whatever we liketh we pass on this right to the commonwealth to do whatever it liketh. Where did we get this right to do whatever we like, I am not questioning our ability to do it but a right is something different then an ability.

Good point Dave. He does say 'and where there are no laws there can be no sinne' - but as someone else pointed out (sorry can't find who) man is basically a social animal. I don't think Hobbes has sound reason to belief that life without laws is 'nasty brutish and short.' If man's natural condition is to seek peace, then war is not a natural condition. Oh and I read again what he meant by natural, and he means unwritten. Sorry. It's a job to keep up. He also based his observations on native Americans, - but why he would assume that other societies would observe the same rules I don't know.

"Covenants, without the sword, are but words, and of no strength to secure man at all." Hobbes says here that men don't keep their promises unless they are compelled to do so. That without some power to keep them to their word, their words are meaningless. I have to agree with this. What do you guys think?

I think religion is also a pretty good threat, with or without swords.

Religion has used the sword plenty but has also used the threat of hell. You'll notice that FEAR is big with Hobbes as a motivating factor why people do things. Fear of hell - fear of physical punishment real or imaginary.

Man's natural condition to seek peace? That's a good bit of insight. Why else enter into society? Is that straight from the book or something you thought up on your own? Hobbes says men naturally seek advantage and are naturally led into war with their fellow man. I think what Hobbes is getting at is that in order to have peace, men need to be under an awesome power - a soveraign.

Hobbes says that through the book 'The first branch, of which Rule containeth the first and Fundamental Law of Nature; which is, 'To seek Peace, and follow it.' The Second, the summe of the Right of Nature; which is, 'By all means we can, to defend ourselves.' ( from OF THE FIRST AND SECOND NATURALL LAWES, AND OF CONTRACTS)
So it is natural, unwritten law is that man should live in peace. However, if he defends himself, and causes war, that is an unnatural condition.
Actually, on the points that he makes of not rebelling against a sovereign, I can see where he's coming from. The deaths and damage in Iraq and now Syria are far worse than under their respective regimes. But under Hobbes' laws society would never move forward (which sort of undermines his argument about things being in perpetual motion)

I totally overlooked the first 'natural law'!!! There's so much in this book. I really should do a post about the natural laws already. I've been meaning to do it. That will help me memorize them a little better.

As for progress. I think I understand what you mean but my only thought is that this is Hobbes' perfect government. I don't think he intends or sees a need for progress beyond what's written in the book.