Social Contract Theory And The Transition From State Of Nature

The Crito and the Republic were both works of Plato. Plato’s works were divided into early, middle and late dialogues. The Crito falls into the category of the formal while the Republic falls into the category of the latter. In his early dialogues, Plato was influenced by Socratic philosophy but as he ages, he starts to develop his distinct and independent philosophy. Justice is the fundamental concept that will be discussed in this paper. The scope of discussion will mainly revolve around the Crito, the Apology and the Republic. In Socrates’ submission and acceptance of his sentence lies the implication that Socrates agrees with democracy as a political system. Plato, on the other hand,

The Republic by Plato examines many aspects of the human condition. In this piece of writing Plato reveals the sentiments of Socrates as they define how humans function and interact with one another. He even more closely Socrates looks at morality and the values individuals hold most important. One value looked at by Socrates and his colleagues is the principle of justice. Multiple definitions of justice are given and Socrates analyzes the merit of each. As the group defines justice they show how self-interest shapes the progression of their arguments and contributes to the definition of justice.

government, Socrates asks Crito, “Well then, since you were brought into the world and nurtured and educated by us, can you deny in the first place that you are our child and slave, as your fathers were before you?” (Plato 664). This question clearly indicates Socrates’s firm belief that the individual is beholden to the state as the child is to the parent; he owes nothing less than his life to the state. Therefore, one has no alternative

Ones’ political and social agreement derives from society. Human nature leads to a state of nature, pre-government, which then the social contract rectifies, creating the purpose of government. Before understanding how the

According to Thomas Jefferson, an influential leader, “No government can continue good but under the control of the people.” Jefferson’s quote suggests that the social contract and state are only run sufficiently under the authority of the people. There is a common assumption that a definite agreement among the population of a society, is dictated by the individuals themselves. In the past, various theorists as well as powerful leaders have made conscience endeavors to demystify whether the social contract is imposed by the sovereign or society. This essay makes an argument that the social compact is dictated by individuals because individuals have the power to alter the governments they exist within. The state is what the people define it as. It is bound by territory, and people, states comprise of governments. The Social Contract is developed by Jean Jacques Rousseau about what is believed to be the greatest method to establish a political community.

A Social contract is an agreement between the people and their government limiting an individual's rights but in exchange offering them protection. The declaration acknowledges ¨That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” (Declaration of Independence) A social contract is implemented to protect the rights of the people and form a civil society. The government is created by the people and, for this reason, is to serve the interests of its citizens fully. The belief that a government derives its authority from the people, in the form of a social contract, correlates to popular sovereignty established by John Locke. Popular sovereignty explains that if a person through a social contract is creating a government then the government, therefore, derives its power from the people. This ensures that if a person is entering society by consent through a social contract they can withdraw their consent because the sovereignty of government is with the people. (We the People, 17) In addition, to the consent to leave the government people also have the ability to overthrow the government is it ever fails to secure and protect their rights.

Philosophers of the 1600’s and 1700s popularized the idea of the “state of nature.” The state of nature is the basis of how people would behave with zero limitations put upon themselves. No matter which philosopher you read, all recognize that life for humans would be much better if there was some way to ensure or gain rights. Thusly, each philosopher creates a social contract, an agreement amongst a populace of people to create a civilization and live together in peace. The social contract creates some form of government. This government is necessary for people to either obtain, or solidify their rights. The type of government theorized about as the best solution varied from one philosopher to the next.

In Crito, Socrates makes a strong claim about the existence of a social contract amongst the state and its citizens. He believes that by choosing to live and flourish in a society you are tactically agreeing to always follow their laws. This mutual agreement is like an eye for an eye, the citizens obey the laws and the government guarantees protection. In this essay, I will argue that the court’s wrongful verdict breaks the social contract Socrates has with Athens and leaves room for civil disobedience. By Socrates complying with his unjust sentence, he creates potential power problems in the city of Athens.

Plato’s Crito records Crito’s endeavor to persuade Socrates to escape from jail to avoid his unjustified death sentence. Crito’s plan is foolproof that Socrates’ will be able to successfully escape to another state. However, Socrates’ contention straightforwardly identifies with the laws of the state and the citizens’ obligations towards the sate. In his argument, Socrates compares the state-citizen relationship to the parent-child relationship. Socrates is shown as a model citizen, who being unjustifiably sentenced will surrender his life in dutifulness to the state. I, with a different perspective, would have to disagree with Socrates’ philosophy regarding the state and its citizens. If I had been wrongfully sentenced to be executed and had found a way to save my life, I would let no chance to slip by my hand.

Skyrms ' book, Evolution of the Social Contract, offers a compelling explanation as to why individuals, when placed with one-shot prisoner 's dilemmas, will often cooperate, or choose the equilibrium that will benefit both parties equally. He uses examples to outline how individuals of certain environments frequently engage in activities that benefit the group at their own personal expense. Using both game theory and decision theory, Skyrms explores problems with the social contract when it is applied to evolutionary dynamics. In the chapters of the book, he offers new insights into concepts such as sex and justice, commitment, and mutual aid.

The social contract theory is the view that in order to form a stable society, a contract or agreement must made implementing the people’s ethical and political obligations . Before this theory people lived in the state of nature meaning, there was no government and no laws were enforced to control their community . Everyone did what they wanted freely. Although “freely” may sound like a good thing; when someone committed, what we call in today’s society, a crime, they received no punishment for it back then . The Social Contract was a way for people to organize their own government and assemble laws that had to be followed by everyone. Doing so, allowed people to find understanding in how administration and authority works, and allowed

Understanding Social Contract Social contract is a convention between humans that aims to discard the state of nature. Under this state of nature, individuals coexist peacefully without the interference by the government and its written rules and regulations. Principles of justice based on individual ability to reason efficiently guide the people’s way of life. These principles include the right to liberty and the right to live. They apply to all individuals regardless of race or ethnicity. Through reasoning, most individuals seek to follow these principles; nonetheless, the lack of written regulations results to challenges especially in the manner at which individuals solve the arising interpersonal conflicts (Maloy, 2009). In times of such conflicts, the state of nature becomes a social contract as individuals seek assistance from the state. To solve these conflicts, the state sets up rules and enforces them prompting the people to pay the state for its role in conflict resolution. In this process, the government sets up legislatures, law enforcement units, and non-partisan judicial systems to protect the right of every individual. This theory explains the processes of forming states and governments. Particularly, this theory focuses on the voluntary provision of information to the government by the people. This is because the government serves the people and it requires accurate information from the people in the process of serving

Social contract denotes that a government or sovereign body exists only to serve the will of the people because the people are the source of political power that is enjoyed by the entity. The people can choose to give or withdraw the power. Not all philosophers agree that the social contract creates rights and obligations; on the contrary, some believe that the social contract imposes restrictions that restrict a person’s natural rights. Individuals who live within the society gain protection by the government from others who may pursue to cause them injury, in exchange, the citizens, must relinquish individual liberties like the capability to commit wrongdoings without being reprimanded, and they should contribute to making society

Since the beginning of the modern age, governments and states have existed in order to maintain moral law. Essentially these institutions are for the greater good of humanity. However, little thought is ever given to how humans lived without governments. Each and every person in the modern age is born into a state, and becomes a part of that state regardless of their will. The concept that humans are born into a state is derived from the social contract. The social contract is a voluntary agreement that allows for the mutual benefit between individuals and governments with regards to the protection and regulation of affairs between members in society. Essentially the idea is that citizens will give up some of their freedoms to the government in return for protection of their remaining rights. Throughout history, there have been a number of philosophers that have discussed the social contract and each philosopher has had there own social contract theories. Leviathan by Thomas Hobbes was the foundation for social contract theory in Western political philosophy. While The Social Contract by Jean-Jacques Rousseau was written a century later and inspired political reforms in Europe. Both Hobbes and Rousseau in their theories appeal to the social contract as being needed as a means to control man in society. However, their theories differ significantly on the basis of the state of nature, the phase after man has left his natural state and

In Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes lays out the hypothetical principal of the state of nature, where human it-self is artificial. It is human nature that people will not be able to love permanently, everyone against everyone power between the strongest. In this nation-state you must be the strongest in order to survive (survival of the fittest). In order to survive there are laws we must follow, to insure of our security because of fear. We were able to suppress our fear, by creating order, to have more order; we must have security, so the social contract appeared.