Mr. Thomas Hobbes wrote in a very mealy mouth manner. However, there might be a good reason for this. He lived during an age when brutal frankness might get one tortured, or even killed. Today a scholar may merely not be invited to attend the liberal white wine and brie cheese get-togethers. A mathematician like John Wallis probably didn’t worry about upsetting the authorities. How cautious was Hobbes? A friend of mine, someone who eventually abandoned his attempt to earn a Political Science Phd, argued that Hobbes was a very religious man, an intensely devout Christian. I personally doubt this very much. However, how can anyone ultimately know for sure? My guess is that Hobbes was somewhat hostile to religious denominations on a personal basis and primarily approached his studies in a thoroughly secular manner. There is even an outside chance he was an atheist. But once again, who can tell by reading his works?

"Forum" is singular; "fora" is plural. The noun is second declension, neuter gender, sharing a form with "stadium".

Whoops!! Fixed now.

Wallis's comment is hilarious. Reminds me of the benighted UseNet.

Still, I always thought Hobbes's greatest STRENGTH was that he defined his terms up front ("sovereign", "commonwealth" &c). If he goes and defines "chalk" up front, and then writes an essay on "chalk" and how it is got from cows and processed - at least you can trace his arguments re "chalk" from first principles. So what if I disagree with the particular word he chose for it?

I'd rather have that, than some unethical @#$% on UseNet talking about "chalk" that sometimes means chalk and sometimes means cheese, depending on what suits his argument best at any given time.

mmmmmmm... tasty Chalk.

The State of Nature is a war of Chalk against Cheese?