Thomas Hobbes Social Contract Theory

Throughout history, many civilizations have had ideas on how to properly manage a society. These ideas go as far back as ancient Greece and the philosopher Socrates, but the most notable and widely accepted ideas on this come from the philosophers Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Their ideas about how a society should be run were known as social contract theories, and although their ideas were different, they all had a common theme that would shape today's definition of the social contract. A Social Contract is basically an agreement between the members of a society to work together for mutual benefit. All the philosophers deemed a social contrast necessary for a properly functioning society.

     Essentially what Hobbes is saying by all of this is that human beings are not fit to govern themselves. The notion of the social contract serves the purpose of saving us from ourselves because, according to Hobbes, humans are not able to do that on their own. The idea of acting on behalf of the common good is, while comprehensible in theory, impossible for humans to execute.

Thomas Hobbes, a 17th century philosopher who is regarded as one of the forefathers of modern political philosophy was born on April 5, 1588 in Westport, near Malmesbury, Wiltshire in England. The unique mind of Thomas Hobbes found profound interest in disciplines like geometry, physics and math, and studied at Magdalen Hall in Oxford. Hobbes is popularly known for his masterpiece The Leviathan, his book that was published in the year of 1651 . Hobbes is well known for being an atheist and for the fruition of what we now know as the “social contract theory” which was “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” (Hobbes, 1651). He is infamous for “having used the social contract method to arrive at the astounding conclusion that we ought to submit to the authority of an undivided and unlimited sovereign power” (Hobbes 1651) . Though Hobbes had formed ideologies and applicable viewpoints on both moral and political philosophy, his conceptualization of moral philosophy has been less influential than his political philosophy, because the theory was rather ambivalent for the content to be agreed upon by the general public of the 17th Century. Hobbes had many arguments of why human beings disobey the law.

Philosophers have always been a great influence in the history of the world. Both Thomas Hobbes (1558-1679) and John Locke (1632-1701) established the framework of their ideas on social contract in the thought of the condition of nature. Their hypothetical support for the formation of a common government gets from certain states of the condition of nature that requires the making of the political body. In this manner, so as to comprehend the political thought about these two creators it is key to concentrate on their origination of the condition of nature. Hobbes and Locke have diverse thoughts with respect to the condition of nature, which has imperative ramifications in their perspective of the social contract. Both creators utilize the sensible instrument of the condition of nature, however they do it another way, subsequently achieve distinctive conclusions. In this exposition the center will be put on the contrast amongst Locke's and Hobbes' thoughts of the condition of nature, and its suggestions for their hypothesis of the social contract, of human instinct, and profound quality.

Hobbes gives us his account of the laws of nature. He claims that it is most rational that people create a social contract with an institution in which would provide stability and peace. People that have obliged to the social contract would then continue to acquire and pursue their desires.

For the people however a social contract was never a good they became nervous with the government in control, which is understanding because of the respect and view of the social classes at the time. In that time period if you were poor you stayed poor and the government did not care about your problems. Whether you need a job or are trying to raise a family, you were left alone all by yourself to fix such problems. Hobbes believed that only a powerful government could ensure an orderly society. This was in the view of a wealthy man that was not part of the daily struggle many other people faced. In his opinion the best government was an absolute monarchy, he felt that the government could impose order and compel obedience.

Born April 5th, 1588, Thomas Hobbes believed that a government run by a single ruler that controlled every aspect of life. He thought that at first humans were naturally equal and free to do whatever they needed to survive, but suffering from fear and danger of death. Which made poor, cold, and short. There wasn’t any laws that could be enforced by anyone in the state of nature. Hobbes wanted people to give over there natural right to one absolute king that could enforce peace on people. Hobbes called this giving over of natural rights, the social contract, in which it would be only between the people, not the king and the people. When the people gave over this right people had no right to revolt. Hobbes was not a fan of the church, for he thought it could interfere with

keOf all the social contract theories that have been put forth, the most influential perhaps have been John Locke’s and Thomas Hobbes’. While both are Natural Law theorists, they have completely different views of man’s state of nature. John Locke thinks of man in a natural state as a peaceful, social being while Thomas Hobbes thinks of man as an aggressive and greedy man. Both theorists also showed that man doesn’t live in a state of nature, social contracts will be formed to govern the populace. It is, however, the reasons for the formation of these social contracts that are of relevance to this essay. I believe that neither of these theories are accurate depictions of man but Hobbes seems more practical in his theory than Locke.

When we think of evolution, especially in scientific terms, we think of species emerging and changing physically, since we are observing the results over long periods of time. Evolution, though, if you can call it that, is a fleeting thing when observed in a smaller timeline, and we find it hard to understand that it is simply the process of life. We appeared on this world only 250,000 years ago, and as far as we can tell, we have not changed much physically, except for the slight racial differences which are slowly disappearing as we mingle more. We are not only changing and evolving physically, but more profoundly mentally, and rather than individually, more as a

Hobbes believed that without a social contract people would come to live in a state of nature. Meaning that there would be no common way of life and people would live in fear of one another. Without the social contract there would be no authority to set up any laws. People would behave in anarchy and chaos. Society would only act on what benefit themselves instead of each other as a whole. This kind of society would only result in an upright war between the people living among each other. Hobbes perceived the ideal society in his best-known piece of work, Leviathan, publish at the end of his exile in 1651. Throughout four books, the Leviathan argues that civil peace and social unity are best accomplished by establishment of common wealth through a social contract.

In light of political philosophy, and more specifically contract theory, there is one philosophy that is undoubtedly inferior to the rest. This happens to be Thomas Hobbes’s social contract theory as articulated in his book The Leviathan. There are many conceptual errors in Hobbes’s theory, but I will first present his theory and then highlight two major issues. The first issue being that his state of nature is irrationally portrayed and his assumptions of apolitical groups are inaccurate- as examples of successful government-free societies exist. This will then lead to the second issue which is that his requirements for his contract theory, tied to his theory as a whole, are not preferable. On these grounds, we will be able to reject

that has a clear purpose to serve the people and protect their individual liberties and property

The premise that is made by the governing body and the current society is known as a social contract. This premise of a social contract is to separate the power between the governing body and the general public in a way that provides an advantage to the general will. The English philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), (http://www.iep.utm.edu/hobmoral/) thought that the complete control by the government was best for the general will of the society. Hobbes thought that majority of the power should to be given to those in power rather than the society. Hobbes believed that society should have complete confidence in their government and should follow that government and do not question it’s authority. Philosopher John Locke (1632-1704) did

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.

The social contract theory defines what we will give up in order to have a stable society. We give up absolute freedom in order to gain stability. People want to know the rules they have to follow and to be protected by the government. Therefore, people don’t really want absolute liberty. In a contract two or more people have to make an agreement in which they give up something to gain something. So the society needs to decide what freedoms they want and which ones they want to transfer over to the government. Locke thinks that our social contract is we are creating laws that make us happy as a society. Hobbes agrees for the most part and says that our biggest job as a society is creating laws that make us happy.