More handpicked essays just for you.
Merits of Hobbes social contract theory
Merits of Hobbes social contract theory
Merits of Hobbes social contract theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines a social contract as an actual or hypothetical agreement among the members of an organized society or between a community and its ruler that defines and limits the rights and duties of each. Social contract theory is rightly associated with modern moral and political theory and is given its first full exposition and defense by Thomas Hobbes. Thomas Hobbes defends the claim that it is never rational to behave unjustly. According to Hobbes, our human nature prevents us from naturally living at peace with one another. Hobbes depicts this by describing a pre-political state of nature in which people constantly war. To move beyond this state of nature, we recognize the need to seek peace, the need to give up our hostile rights, and the need to keep our agreements. Accordingly, we enter into a social contract with one another and establish a …show more content…
Thomas Hobbes’ legal theory is based on “Social contract”. According to Hobbes, prior to social contract, “man” lived in the State of Nature. “Man’s” life in the State of Nature was one of fear and selfishness. “Man” lived in chaotic condition of constant fear. Life in the State of Nature was “solitary”, “poor”, “nasty”, “brutish”, and “short”. “Man” has a natural desire for security and order. In order to secure self-protection and self-preservation, and to avoid misery and pain, “man” entered into a contract. This idea of self-preservation and self-protection are inherent in “man’s” nature and in order to achieve this, voluntarily surrendered all their rights and freedoms by this contract to some authority who must command obedience. As a result of this contract, the mightiest authority is to protect and preserve their lives and property. This led to the emergence of the institution of the “ruler” or “monarch”, who shall be the absolute
He states that, “Every one with every one...Shall be given by the major part, the right to present the person of them all” (Hobbes [1651] 2013). Thus, a democratic form of governance is beginning to emerge, and the responsibility of the sovereign is to form laws that avoid returning to a state of nature. Essentially, Hobbes presents a way of government that appears optimal, and capable of lasting a long term. The elected sovereign is not to be overthrown because through the unanimous decision of members of the state the sovereign was chosen, and maintain authority through deliverance of suitable laws (Hobbes [1651] 2013). Thus, citizens are more likely to comply with this form of government because they maintain the impression that their sovereign only looks out for their best interests, as well as recognizes what is best for them because he was chosen to be in
...d seek peace. In establishing a covenant and instituting a sovereign, men give up the rights they possessed in the state of nature, as well as the right to live without tyranny. However for Hobbes, those sacrifices are overshadowed by what is gained by living under a truly absolute sovereign. A sovereign, corrupt or not, guarantees order and prevents chaos and death. Those are, word for word, the reasons the social contract was initially established and therefore fully justify the creation of an absolute sovereign. Thomas Hobbes, who wrote Leviathan during the English Civil Wars, looked out his window at chaos and decided that survival should be pursued at all costs.
Thomas Hobbes believes that the optimal form of authority is one that has absolute power over its people, consisting of just one person who will retain the exclusive ability to oversee and decide on all of society’s issues. This Sovereign will be constituted by a social contract with the people. With that, the Sovereign will hold all of the citizens’ rights, and will be permitted to act in whichever way he or she deems necessary. The philosopher comes to this conclusion with deductive reasoning, utilizing a scientific method with straightforward arguments to prove his point.
Similar to Hobbes, a contract is made between people. The social contract requires them to totally alienate all of their rights to the entire community. This is a significant difference from Hobbes theory because in this case the people are laying down their rights to one another and not to a sole figure. Because the social contract is set up in this way, there is no room from reservations; no one would try and make the contract harder for anyone because to do that would in turn make it harder for themselves. The lack of partiality creates a near perfect union. (Rousseau, 164) Another major difference between this theory and the one formerly mentioned is that this agreement is advantageous for the soon to be subjects. This advantage goes beyond safety from the state of nature; by agreeing to surrender all of their rights to each person without there being one man who retains it, they gain “the equivalent of everything he loses” however this time there is more force to preserve them. Now, one may wonder how this can work if everybody gains back the rights they surrendered to make the contract. We can understand this as people who come together, promising to not use these rights against each other, an instead they combine them to create a sum of forces that can withstand the resistance presented in the state of nature. (Rousseau, 163) After the contract is set up the
In order to fully grasp Hobbes' theory of Social Contract, one must first become familiar with his basic premises of "The State of Nature." In this state each individual is inherently in a perpetual state of war, due to several given reasons. Hobbes assumes that "Nature hath made men…equall." (Hobbes 183) Also, that in this state of war all men exemplify purely egoistic behavior, striving to do whatever possible to maximize their own utility, even if it requires murdering another. In addition to these conditions, in the state of nature, there exists a state of natural scarcity, in which, a finite amount of goods, possessions, property, "cattell," "wives," whatever, exist to satisfy man's infinite wants. "And therefore if any two men desire the same thing…they become enemies and…endeavour to destroy or subdue one an other." (Hobbes 184) Hence, creating a constant state of war.
Hobbes views human nature as the war of each man against each man. For Hobbes, the essence of human nature can be found when we consider how man acts apart from any government or order. Hobbes describes the world as “a time of war, where every man is enemy to every man.” (Hobbes mp. 186) In such a world, there are “no arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death; and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” (Hobbes mp. 186) Hobbes believes that laws are what regulate us from acting in the same way now. He evidences that our nature is this way by citing that we continue to lock our doors for fear of theft or harm. Hobbes gives a good argument which is in line with what we know of survivalism, and evidences his claim well. Hobbes claims that man is never happy in having company, unless that company is utterly dominated. He says, “men have no pleasure, (but on the contrary a great dea...
Thomas Hobbes is now broadly viewed as one of a smaller group of truly extraordinary political thinkers, whose major work was the Leviathan rivals in meaning the political writings of Plato, Aristotle, Locke, Rousseau, Kant, and Rawls. Hobbes is most known for his for his early and elaborate development of what has come to be known as “social contract theory”, the method of justifying political principles or arrangements by appeal to the agreement that would be made among suitably situated rational, free, and equal persons. He is most famous for using his theory on the social contract to submit that human beings should submit to an absolute—undivided and unlimited—sovereign power (Lloyd, 2014) Hobbes wanted to ascertain the clear values for the construction of a civil organization that would not be subject to destruction from within. Hobbes maintains the ideology that people should look at their government as having absolute authority, while arguing that the government has absolute power he reserves the idea that we have the liberty of disobeying some of our government's instructions. He argues that subjects retain a
Thomas Hobbes says that there must be a strong sovereign because it is the only possibility other than the state of nature. In the state of nature every man is equal and having equal rights to all things, all would be in constant war against one another. In this case no one is assured that he will have the fruits of his own labor, and thus there is no labor done but life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short." That man would choose to remain in this state is not an option to Hobbes. He says that for men to "seek peace and follow it" is a law of nature. Thus for Hobbes obedience to the sovereign is a choice that everyone must make, because it is natural and reasonable to make it, and because it is the only option other than the state of nature.
Hobbes has presented to the reader a geometric and organized map of an ideal governing situation. Man is a product of nature. But the interpretation of nature is purely a social construction. Nature is what it is; yet man, through his own filter of subjectivity, creates his own understanding of nature and its universal purpose. So the concept of truth in nature is hardly truth at all, but merely a creation of man so that he can understand the incomprehensible. Then what exactly is the truth of man's existence? To put it plainly, man has little power over nature. This causes the life of man to be, in Hobbes's own words, "nasty, brutish, and short." Fundamentally, in man's "natural condition of mankind" there is a constant, mechanical search for sustenance- food, housing, and power. Man is put in a situation of constant battle of wills in order to survive. In Hobbes's terms this is the State of Nature. Man needs to escape this state, and Hobbes offers a theoretically viable solution. By accepting the basic Law of Nature (the right of self-preservation) man hereby accepts a social contract. The contract generally provides man with peace, and ...
Force, Morality and Rights in Thomas Hobbes and John Locke's Social Contract Theories. Throughout history, the effects of the unequal distribution of power and justice within societies have become apparent through the failure of governments, resulting in the creation of theories regarding ways to balance the amount of power given and the way in which justice is enforced. Due to this need for change, Thomas Hobbes and John Locke created two separate theories in which the concept of a social contract is used to determine the ways in which a government can govern without forfeiting justice. In this essay, the relationship between force, morality, and rights within both theories will be investigated in order to determine the most beneficial format for society based on the ideas of the natural condition of mankind, the rights of the government, and the rights of the governed.
In sophisticated prose, Hobbes manages to conclude that human beings are all equal in their ability to harm each other, and furthermore that they are all capable of rendering void at will the covenants they had previously made with other human beings. An absolutist government, according to Hobbes, would result in a in a society that is not entirely focused on self-preservation, but rather a society that flourishes under the auspices of peace, unity, and security. Of all the arguably great philosophical discourses, Hobbes in particular provides one of the surest and most secure ways to live under a sovereign that protects the natural liberties of man. The sovereign government is built upon the idea of stability and security, which makes it a very intriguing and unique government indeed. The aforementioned laudation of Hobbes and his assertions only helps to cement his political theories at the forefront of the modern
In this essay, I will present three reasons as to why the absolute authority of the sovereign in Hobbes’s state of nature and social contract is justified. The three reasons Hobbes uses are: the argument from contract, the argument from authorisation and the argument from weakness of mixed or divided sovereignty. Firstly, I shall explain Hobbes’s understanding of human nature and the natural condition of humanity which causes the emergence of the social contract. I shall then analyse each argument for the absolute authority of the sovereign being justified. I shall then consider possible objections to Hobbes’s argument. I shall then show why Hobbes’s argument is successful and the absolute authority of the sovereign is justified.
In The Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes talks about his views of human nature and describes his vision of the ideal government which is best suited to his views.
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.
Thomas Hobbes creates a clear idea of the social contract theory in which the social contract is a collective agreement where everyone in the state of nature comes together and sacrifices all their liberty in return to security. “In return, the State promises to exercise its absolute power to maintain a state of peace (by punishing deviants, etc.)” So are the power and the ability of the state making people obey to the laws or is there a wider context to this? I am going to look at the different factors to this argument including a wide range of critiques about Hobbes’ theory to see whether or not his theory is convincing reason for constantly obeying the law.