Social Contract Theory : Theories of Origin of State (Part 2)

SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY ARE GIVEN BY and when:

Contents

Thinkers:

Thomas Hobbes:
- Nature of State: The state of nature is a condition of constant conflict and competition for resources. Life is “nasty, brutish, and short.”
- Contract Formation: People enter into a social contract to escape the state of nature and establish a powerful, centralized authority to maintain order and security.
John Locke:
- Nature of State: The state of nature is a state of equality and freedom where people have natural rights to life, liberty, and property.
- Contract Formation: The social contract is formed to protect and preserve these natural rights through a limited government that serves the people’s interests.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau:
- Nature of State: In the state of nature, people are inherently good and free, but societal inequalities corrupt them.
- Contract Formation: The social contract is a collective agreement to establish a just society where individuals retain their freedom while participating in a common will to achieve the general good.

Why Contract Formed in These Nature of State:

Hobbes: To escape the chaos and violence of the state of nature.
Locke: To protect and preserve natural rights in a more orderly and secure environment.
Rousseau: To address the corrupting influence of inequality and create a just society where people cooperate for the common good.

Differentiation:

Hobbes’ state of nature is characterized by fear and conflict, necessitating a strong central authority.
Locke’s state of nature is marked by individual rights and freedoms, calling for a limited government to protect these rights.
Rousseau’s state of nature emphasizes the corrupting effects of inequality, leading to a collective agreement for the common good.

Common Elements:

All three theorists propose a hypothetical social contract to establish organized societies.
They agree that in the state of nature, life is challenging and lacks security.
Social contracts aim to create a more stable and just society, although they differ in their interpretations of human nature and the role of government.

Name