social contract
-
What is a social contract in political philosophy?
In political philosophy, a social contract is a compact or agreement between the ruled and their rulers that defines the rights and duties of each. Social contract theories gained prominence in the 17th and 18th centuries through the works of Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.
These theories aimed to justify political authority based on individual self-interest and rational consent. They compared the advantages of organized government with the disadvantages of the state of nature, arguing that government is useful when accepted as a voluntary obligation. The social contract was meant to logically deduce the essential rights and duties of citizens. The theories varied, with some justifying the power of the sovereign and others safeguarding individuals from oppression.
2 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
Why do societies need social contracts?
Societies need social contracts to define the rights and duties between the ruled and their rulers. Social contract theory assumes that people in a state of nature form a society and government through a compact or agreement based on reason.
Without a social contract, a state of nature could result in a "war of all against all," where life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short". People surrender some freedoms to a central authority in exchange for domestic peace and the protection of their rights. These conclusions are then reduced to the form of a social contract, from which it is supposed that all the essential rights and duties of citizens could be logically deduced.
3 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
Who are some famous philosophers who wrote about the social contract?
The social contract is a theory that explores the legitimacy of state authority and the obligations between the state and its citizens. Prominent philosophers who wrote about the social contract include:
- Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679): Hobbes argued that individuals in a state of nature would relinquish some rights to an absolute sovereign to ensure collective security.
- John Locke (1632–1704): Locke posited that individuals possess natural rights to life, liberty, and property, and the state's authority is limited to protecting these rights. Revolt is justified if the state fails to do so.
- Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778): Rousseau believed that the state should represent the collective will of its citizens, ensuring freedom and moral autonomy.
- Immanuel Kant (1724-1804): Kant was influenced by Hobbes, and connected moral and political decision making to self-interest.
6 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
How does the social contract explain the creation of governments?
The social contract is a theory that explains the creation of governments by positing an agreement between individuals and their rulers. In this view, people initially exist in a state of nature, which can be either happy or unhappy, depending on the philosopher's perspective.
To escape the drawbacks of this state, individuals come together and form a society and government through a social contract. By consenting to organized rule, people give up some freedom to a central authority, which in turn guarantees domestic peace and social order. Philosophers like Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau shaped social contract theory, justifying political authority based on individual self-interest and rational consent.
3 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
What are some differences in how philosophers like Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau described the social contract?
Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau used the concept of a social contract to examine the relationship between the state and its citizens, but they arrived at different conclusions.
- Hobbes believed that in the state of nature, life was a "war of all against all," and that people were self-seeking and competitive. To escape this brutish existence, individuals give up their rights to a sovereign with absolute power in exchange for safety and security.
- Locke argued that individuals possess natural rights to life, liberty, and property in the state of nature. The government, formed through a social contract, is necessary to protect these rights. If the government fails to do so, the people have the right to revolt.
- Rousseau considered the state of nature relatively peaceful, but believed that a social contract was necessary to address conflicts arising from social growth and interdependence. For Rousseau, the state's authority comes from the "general will" of the people, which aims at the common good.
6 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles. -
How does the idea of a social contract affect our rights and responsibilities as citizens today?
The social contract theory, developed in the 17th and 18th centuries, posits that individuals give up some freedoms to a central authority in exchange for protection and domestic peace. Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau believed that civilized society arises from a state of nature through a social contract.
Today, the idea of a social contract affects citizens' rights and responsibilities by defining the limits of state power and the circumstances under which a state can be overthrown. It influences modern theories of justice, like those of John Rawls and Robert Nozick, and plays a role in ethical theory by suggesting that moral principles are justified if rational, self-interested individuals would agree to observe them.
2 Britannica SourcesCreated from Britannica articles using AI. AI can make mistakes, so verify using Britannica articles.
social contract, in political philosophy, an actual or hypothetical compact, or agreement, between the ruled or between the ruled and their rulers, defining the rights and duties of each. In primeval times, according to the theory, individuals were born into an anarchic state of nature, which was happy or unhappy according to the particular version of the theory. They then, by exercising natural reason, formed a society (and a government) by means of a social contract.
Although similar ideas can be traced to the Greek Sophists, social-contract theories had their greatest currency in the 17th and 18th centuries and are associated with the English philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke and the French philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. What distinguished these theories of political obligation from other doctrines of the period was their attempt to justify and delimit political authority on the grounds of individual self-interest and rational consent. By comparing the advantages of organized government with the disadvantages of the state of nature, they showed why and under what conditions government is useful and ought therefore to be accepted by all reasonable people as a voluntary obligation. These conclusions were then reduced to the form of a social contract, from which it was supposed that all the essential rights and duties of citizens could be logically deduced.
Theories of the social contract differed according to their purpose: some were designed to justify the power of the sovereign, while others were intended to safeguard the individual from oppression by a sovereign who was all too powerful.
" height="20" alt="HEW Logo">
The social contract in Hobbes
According to Hobbes (Leviathan, 1651), the state of nature was one in which there were no enforceable criteria of right and wrong. People took for themselves all that they could, and human life was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” The state of nature was therefore a state of war, which could be ended only if individuals agreed (in a social contract) to give their liberty into the hands of a sovereign, on the sole condition that their lives were safeguarded by sovereign power.
For Hobbes the authority of the sovereign is absolute, in the sense that no authority is above the sovereign, whose will is law. That, however, does not mean that the power of the sovereign is all-encompassing: subjects remain free to act as they please in cases in which the sovereign is silent (in other words, when the law does not address the action concerned). The social contract allows individuals to leave the state of nature and enter civil society, but the former remains a threat and returns as soon as governmental power collapses. Because the power of Leviathan (the political state) is uncontested, however, its collapse is very unlikely and occurs only when it is no longer able to protect its subjects.
The social contract in Locke
Locke (in the second of the Two Treatises of Government, 1690) differed from Hobbes insofar as he conceived of the state of nature not as a condition of complete license but rather as a state in which humans, though free, equal, and independent, are obliged under the law of nature to respect each other’s rights to life, liberty, and property. Individuals nevertheless agree to form a commonwealth (and thereby to leave the state of nature) in order to institute an impartial power capable of arbitrating disputes and redressing injuries. Accordingly, Locke held that the obligation to obey civil government under the social contract was conditional upon the protection of the natural rights of each person, including the right to private property. Sovereigns who violated these terms could be justifiably overthrown.
Locke thus stated one of the fundamental principles of political liberalism: that there can be no subjection to power without consent—though once political society has been founded, citizens are obligated to accept the decisions of a majority of their number. Such decisions are made on behalf of the majority by the legislature, though the ultimate power of choosing the legislature rests with the people; and even the powers of the legislature are not absolute, because the law of nature remains as a permanent standard and as a principle of protection against arbitrary authority.
The trusted destination for professionals, college students, and lifelong learners.
SUBSCRIBE
