It does not need to be true to provide a good model. This happens in most concrete sciences so why not in humanistics? Actually when contrasted with the noble

It does not need to be true to provide a good model. This happens in most concrete sciences so why not in humanistics? Actually when contrasted with the noble savage of Rousseau, the human as a bestial savage provides a great ground level from human behavior. From that model you can then have a model for the worst case scenarios of behavior and form governance from that. Probably not the optimum or most efficient but probably the model with the broadest applicability. This is what captivated me in Hobbes. Lot's of unanswered needs, but a very stable base for survival and improvements. I think it is also the model most people could understand at a basic level: Do not do that otherwise <the sovereign> will punish you. Even a child understand this with the parents being the sovereign.