Abstract
Geoffrey Brennan has presented a defense of Hobbes against the claim of misrepresentation of the prophet Samuel as supporting a leviathan. He has also used the occasion of his reply to introduce embellishments that were outside of the scope of my observations concerning the prophet Samuel and Hobbes.
Article PDF
References
Aschheim, J., & Tavlas, G. S. (2004). Academic exclusion: the case of Alexander Del Mar. European Journal of Political Economy, 20, 31–60.
Brennan, G. (2009, in press). Hobbes’ Samuel. Public Choice.
Hillman, A. L. (1998). Political economy and political correctness. Public Choice, 96, 219–239. Reprinted in: Congleton, R. D., Hillman, A. L., & Konrad, K. A. (Eds.) (2008). Forty years of research on rent seeking 2—Applications: rent seeking in practice (pp. 791–811). Berlin: Springer.
Hillman, A. L. (2004). Nietzschean development failures. Public Choice, 119, 263–280.
Hillman, A. L. (2009). Hobbes and the prophet Samuel on leviathan government. Public Choice. doi:10.1007/s11127-009-9447-6.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
I thank Heinrich Ursprung and Warren Young for helpful comments and Joel Guttman, Daniel Levy, and Hillel Rapoport for discussions.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hillman, A.L. Hobbes and Samuel: reply. Public Choice 141, 13–15 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-009-9446-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-009-9446-7