Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on social contract theory
Essays on social contract theory
Essays on social contract theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on social contract theory
Dhruv Patel
Coming from a world in which many people choose to follow their own morals based on what they believe, I would choose to pursue a life in which I could be more compassionate and care for how my morals affect others. I think the Virtual Moral Theory would have the greatest impact in my life because showing compassion for my actions would benefit the people surrounding me and myself. Kant’s Theory states that one would need to do things in accordance to God, which is true for some people but doesn’t back up many actions that are immoral. For instance, for Atheists, the belief that God isn’t real would give them no sturdy ground to base their actions off of. In my eyes, different groups don’t share the same God. So which actions
…show more content…
An example of this theory is when two siblings are fighting over a piece of cake, the siblings both decide to settle the dispute through a contract which states that only the person to win a game of dice could eat the cake. This is a theory that society primarily follows today in terms of the laws that bind us to the U.S. However, again, it is very difficult to create order in our society even with these laws because there is thousands of crimes being committed daily even with these “contracted” orders. Rachels states in his book The Elements of Moral Philosophy, “...none of us ever signed a “real” contract - there is no piece of paper bearing our signatures” (95). This being a true argument, leads me to believe that if society were given these terms, which they are, there would still be the small number of disobedient members that choose to do as they wish since they have not signed a legal document stating otherwise. I think that the Social Contract Theory is already a part of my daily life because I choose to follow the contract of the legal system, although I haven’t actually signed a legal …show more content…
This is because the theory is oriented around care and compassion that the world could always use more of. I think that the only thing that could go wrong with this theory is the idea of greed and jealousy causing one to argue that maybe there are many people in the world who cannot accomplish the goals of this theory. I think that there is two ways to go about this, by giving the world and people around us a bit more compassion and by trying to care about our actions before we proceed with them. Rachels states, “Generosity is desirable because there will always be people who need help,” and I agree because there are many people who don’t get the same advantages as us, and this should be a sign that we should help
In the short article titled “Virtual Morality” by Andrew Tuplin, Tuplin compares both video games and movies that violate moral beliefs according to the social norm. He argues the fact that technology is and will continue to challenge moral beliefs as well as the norm for what we see as acceptable in the real world. I for one see this issue to be harmful and threatening to the way we interact with the world on a daily basis. These so called “fantasy worlds” are confusing young minds and allowing them to create their own image to what is both morally right and wrong in society. This essay will explain why I feel that children should not be allowed to participate in violent video games and movies because the violence they learn will eventually introduce itself in society in one way or another.
Can suicide be justified as morally correct? This is one of the many questions Immanuel Kant answers in, “The Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals”. Kant discusses many questions with arguable answers, which explains why he is one of the most controversial philosophers still today. Throughout Kant’s work, multiple ideas are considered, but the Categorical Imperative is one of the most prevalent. Though this concept is extremely dense, the Categorical Imperative is the law of freedom that grounds pure ethics of the metaphysics of ethics. Categorical imperatives are the basis of morality because they provoke pure reasons for every human beings actions. By the end of his work, one will understand Kant’s beliefs on morality, but to explain this, he goes into depth on the difference between hypothetical imperatives and Categorical Imperative, two different formulations of the Categorical Imperative, and a few examples.
Moral Theory and Personal Relationships In his article "The Schizophrenia of Modern Ethical Theories," Michael Stocker argues that mainstream ethical theories, namely consequentialism and deontology, are incompatible with maintaining personal relations of love, friendship, and fellow feeling because they both overemphasise the role of duty, obligation, and rightness, and ignore the role of motivation in morality. Stocker states that the great goods of life, i.e. love, friendship, etc., essentially contain certain motives and preclude others, such as those demanded by mainstream ethics.11 In his paper "Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality," Peter Railton argues that a particular version of consequentialism, namely sophisticated consequentialism, is not incompatible with love, affection and acting for the sake of others. In the essays "War and Massacre" and "Autonomy and Deontology," Thomas Nagel holds that a theory of absolutism, i.e. deontology, may be compatible with maintaining personal commitments. The first objective of this paper is to demonstrate that despite the efforts of both Railton and Nagel, consequentialism and deontology do not in fact incorporate personal relations into morality in a satisfactory way.
ABSTRACT: A commonly accepted criticism of the social contract approach to justifying political authority targets the notion of hypothetical consent. Hypothetical contracts, it is argued, are not binding; therefore hypothetical consent cannot justify political authority. I argue that although hypothetical consent may not be capable of creating political obligation, it has the power to legitimate political arrangements.
Every human being carries with them a moral code of some kind. For some people it is a way of life, and they consult with their code before making any moral decision. However, for many their personal moral code is either undefined or unclear. Perhaps these people have a code of their own that they abide to, yet fail to recognize that it exists. What I hope to uncover with this paper is my moral theory, and how I apply it in my everyday life. What one does and what one wants to do are often not compatible. Doing what one wants to do would usually bring immediate happiness, but it may not benefit one in the long run. On the other hand, doing what one should do may cause immediate unhappiness, even if it is good for oneself. The whole purpose of morality is to do the right thing just for the sake of it. On my first paper, I did not know what moral theories where; now that I know I can say that these moral theories go in accordance with my moral code. These theories are utilitarianism, natural law theory, and kantianism.
James Rachels expresses his thoughts on what a satisfactory moral theory would be like. Rachels says a “satisfactory theory would be realistic about where human beings fit in the grand scheme of things” (Rachels, 173). Even though there is an existing theory on how humans came into this world there is not enough evidence to prove the theory to be correct. In addition to his belief of knowing how our existence came into play, he also has a view on the way we treat people and the consequences of our actions. My idea of a satisfactory moral theory would be treating people the way we wish to be treated, thinking of what results from our doings, as well as living according to the best plan.
Kant’s moral philosophy is built around the formal principles of ethics rather than substantive human goods. He begins by outlining the principles of reasoning that can be equally expected of all rational persons regardless of their individual desires or partial interests. It creates an ideal universal community of rational individuals who can collectively agree on the moral principles for guiding equality and autonomy. This is what forms the basis for contemporary human rig...
Deontological moral theory is a Non-Consequentialist moral theory. While consequentialists believe the ends always justify the means, deontologists assert that the rightness of an action is not simply dependent on maximizing the good, if that action goes against what is considered moral. It is the inherent nature of the act alone that determines its ethical standing. For example, imagine a situation where there are four critical condition patients in a hospital who each need a different organ in order to survive. Then, a healthy man comes to the doctor’s office for a routine check-up. According to consequentialism, not deontology, the doctor should and must sacrifice that one man in order to save for others. Thus, maximizing the good. However, deontological thought contests this way of thinking by contending that it is immoral to kill the innocent despite the fact one would be maximizing the good. Deontologists create concrete distinctions between what is moral right and wrong and use their morals as a guide when making choices. Deontologists generate restrictions against maximizing the good when it interferes with moral standards. Also, since deontologists place a high value on the individual, in some instances it is permissible not to maximize the good when it is detrimental to yourself. For example, one does not need to impoverish oneself to the point of worthlessness simply to satisfy one’s moral obligations. Deontology can be looked at as a generally flexible moral theory that allows for self-interpretation but like all others theories studied thus far, there are arguments one can make against its reasoning.
Through his discussion of morals in the Grounding for the Metaphysics of Morals, Immanuel Kant explores the question of whether a human being is capable of acting solely out of pure duty and if our actions hold true moral value. In passage 407, page 19, Kant proposes that if one were to look at past experiences, one cannot be certain that his or her rationalization for performing an action that conforms with duty could rest solely on moral grounds. In order to fully explain the core principle of moral theory, Kant distinguishes between key notions such as a priori and a posteriori, and hypothetical imperative vs. categorical imperative, in order to argue whether the actions of rational beings are actually moral or if they are only moral because of one’s hidden inclinations.
This mutual transference of rights is called a contract, or covenant. By adhering to the contract, a man gives up whatever rights set forth by the contract. However, man cannot give up his right to defend himself, for the entire purpose of entering the contract is self-preservation. Once the contract is formed, one must obey Hobbes’ third law of nature, which is to adhere to the contract (Leviathan 1, 14)...
HILLIARD, J. And O’SULLIVAN, J. (2012) The Law of Contract [Online] 5th Ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Available from - http://books.google.co.uk/ [Accessed: 2nd January 2014]
‘Psychological contracts refer to beliefs that individuals hold regarding promises made or implied, accepted and relied upon between themselves and another. Because psychological contracts represent how people interpret promises and commitments, both parties in the same employment relationship (employer and employee) can have different views regarding specific terms’ (Rousseau, Wade-Benzoni, p467)
The Social Contract is an attempt to explain the reason why individuals agree to form organized governments. The idea that a person is willing to abandon the freedoms previously enjoyed under the State of Nature in which no government interfered with their pursuits, are believed to correspond to the individual’s attempt to protect what is on their best interest.
Friend, Celeste. "Social Contract Theory [Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy]." Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Hamilton College, 15 Oct. 2004. Web. 01 Oct. 2011. .
We should put an agreement is an assention between two gatherings. On the off chance that one gathering damages the terms of the understanding, the agreement is not any more substantial. Social orders are controlled by governments. This is the beginning stage for talking about social contract hypothesis. Masterminds who trust in this hypothesis contend that individuals advantage from living respectively in nations, kingdoms, or under different sorts of legislative oversight.