by Louise Rusling

Created on: July 21, 2007   Last Updated: July 22, 2007

The social contract theory can be defined loosely as a sort of hypothetical or actual agreement between society and its state. This agreement has been said to be responsible for the bases of our moral decisions and stances. In other words we merely abide by the governments rules and regulations in the hope that others will do the same, subsequently leading to a more secure and comfortable life. This theory draws on several philosophers, who include Hobbes, Locke, Hume and Rousseau, to explore whether it is true that our moral obligations can be explained by a social contract. Each Philosopher has a different take on this argument, Hobbes for example gives a vivid and bleak account of what life would be like without a social contract, otherwise known as the state of nature', denoting that the social contract plays a big part in our moral actions. Whereas Locke is a lot more optimistic and painted a more attractive picture of the state of nature', suggesting that our moral duties would still stand even without enforced rules and regulations. Hume passes judgement on both these philosophers and feels that there is no need for a social contract to shape our moral obligations because common sense would tell us that respect for each other would be a necessity to ensure a manageable society. The last philosopher, named Rousseau felt that the social contact was an agreement between individuals that is held together by common interests. Rousseau gives a different perceptive on the social contract, explaining that it doesn't have to mean sacrificing our freedom to a government in the hope for security, simply because so much can be gained by co-operating as part of a society. By examining each of these philosophers views regarding the social contract theory we can begin to not only question the nature of our morality but also our relationship with authority.

Thomas Hobbes book Leviathan' (1651) captures his main ideas around morality being the same as the law. In other words our actions are governed by the law and not our conscience. This very notion is depicted in his version of the state of nature' where no laws exist. Life in the state of nature' in Hobbes words is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short' and also that man is in continual fear, and in danger of a violent death.'(1) Once we begin to examine life without rules and regulations we can really begin to question and reflect on our own morality. It could be argued that even if we did want to take the moral

• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next Page >>