ABSTRACT
A supplementary reason for the critical attention has been that Hobbes's perceived debility, if the standard interpretation is followed, has meant that Hobbes's reply to the Foole has been a battle line between that interpretation and an alternative. In the case, which calls that of the Loud Foole, he expressly and publicly declares that he thinks that injustice or lawbreaking may sometimes be reasonable. If it is taken to mean he declares thereafter, we are dealing here with a Loud Foole; even if it is understood as meaning that he declares thereby, Hobbes's Foole is a Flagrant Foole. In his argument against the Foole, Hobbes aims to get citizens to obey by arguing for the imprudence of proclaiming injustice. If Hobbes were judging the Silent Foole, we could at least expect him to mount an argument that one may be foolish even when choosing a course of action that can be expected to be profitable.
