Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The social contract jean jacques rousseau essay
The critique of John Locke's social contract theory
Thomas Hobbes social contract theory
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The social contract jean jacques rousseau essay
This paper attempts to analyse the relationship between the civil society and the state and economic forces. In particular the paper seeks to historicize the concept of civil society and social contract. The paper uses the social contract theorists particularly Thomas Hobbes Leviathan (1965), John Locke Two Treatises of Government (1690) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau The Social Contract (1994) as fundamental political theorists in making a critical analysis of civil society and social contract. In order to provide a debate on the social contract and civil society historical accounts and analysis are drawn from the sources of Hegel’s Philosophy of Rights (1991), Karl Marx’s the 18th Brumaire (1852), Karl Marx the Jewish Question (1843), Plato’s …show more content…
Why social contract? When it legitimate to disobey community’s laws? What makes a social contract legally or morally binding? What kind of coercion can be found in social contract? The paper attempts to present a detailed account on these questions.
Historical Perspectives of Civil Society
G. W.F. Hegel defines civil society an association of members who are self-sufficient individuals in a formal universality, occasioned by their needs and by the legal constitution as a means of security for persons and property, and by an external order for their particular and common interests. Civil Society (in
…show more content…
It was first used by Aristotle in his argument that every community is established for sake of some good and every community aims at some good and mankind always act in order to obtain what he thinks is good. During this period civil society was a sphere in which man had the all round possibilities of achieving his full moral status. To Aristotle, civil society was still a political association that improved its citizens, but it was founded on the respect for the different spheres and multiple associations in which life lived. Additionally, the association was meant to living beings that had a sense of good and evil and bad and good of making a family and a state. The members of the association had necessarily some one thing the same and common to all, in which they shared equally or unequally in terms of food, land and any other things. However, Rousseau believes that a transfer from the state of nature to the civil state, produces in man very a remarkable change of replacing instinct by justice in his behaviour and conferring on his actions the moral quality that he had lacked before; it is only now, as the voice of duty succeeds to physical impulse and right to appetite that man who had previously thought of nothing but himself is compelled to act on the principle and to consult his reason before attending to his inclinations. Although in civil
Second Treatise of Government by John Locke and Discourse on the Origin of Inequality by Jean-Jacques Rousseau are books written to try and explain the origin of society. Both try to explain the evils and inequalities of society, and to a certain degree to discuss whether man in his natural state is better than man in society. These political science based theories do not appear, at first, to have anything in common with J. Hector St. John De Crèvecoeur’s Letters from an American Farmer, which are letters written by Crèvecoeur during the settling of America and the beginning of the American Revolution, however with examination we can see reflection of both Locke’s and Rousseau’s ideas about things such as human nature, government, and inequality.
In the 1800’s, the social structure of Europe was changing. The industrial revolution brought new technologies and techniques that lead to more production, and a more prosperous European society. With these great changes to society and the way things were produced, changes in the government and how the society was run was imminent. Both The Law by Frederic Bastiat and Communist Manifesto by Karl Marx present new and fresh ideas on how society should be governed, Bastiat going into the concepts of liberalism and Marx the concepts of communism, both of which are oriented to the individual rights of people in these European societies.
Locke states that the correct form of civil government should be committed to the common good of the people, and defend its citizens’ rights to life, health, liberty, and personal possessions. He expects that a civil government’s legislative branch will create laws which benefit the wellbeing of its citizens, and that the executive branch will enforce laws under a social contract with the citizenry. “The first and fundamental positive law of all common-wealths is the establishing of the legislative power; as the first and fundamental natural law, which is to govern even the legislative itself, is the preservation of the society and (as far as will consist with the public good) of every person in it.”1 Locke believes that humans inherently possess complete and i...
A Theory of Justice is the magnum opus of 20th century social contract theorist and political philosopher, John Rawls. A bit of background into this work is that social contract theory had fallen out of favor with political scientists and philosophers since the last 18th century, with the success of the American Revolution and the apparent triumph of John Locke and Democracy. However, with the advent of modern globalization, the emergence of America as a superpower, but the growing concern of socio-economic disparity necessitated a revisiting of the social contract, what it means, how societies and governments were best constructed.
At the core of their theories, both Locke and Rousseau seek to explain the origin of civil society, and from there to critique it, and similarly both theorists begin with conceptions of a state of nature: a human existence predating civil society in which the individual does not find institutions or laws to guide or control one’s behaviour. Although both theorists begin with a state of nature, they do not both begin with the same one. The Lockean state of nature is populated by individuals with fully developed capacities for reason. Further, these individuals possess perfect freedom and equality, which Locke intends as granted by God. They go about their business rationally, acquiring possessions and appropriating property, but they soon realize the vulnerability of their person and property without any codified means to ensure their security...
In the writings of Jean-Jacques Rousseau he describes what he believes is the state of nature and the social contract that humans form in civilizations. This discussion mostly takes place in his book called the “Social Contract”. The first area that will be covered is what Rousseau thinks is the state of nature. This will then be followed by what he believes is the social contract that humans enter to live in normal society or civilization. The last portion will be to critic and summarize his findings.
Rousseau’s political theory revolves around a central idea that in order to deal with moral or political inequality (“social” inequality), man must move out of the state of nature and establish a social contract, “a form of association which defends and protects… the person and goods of each associate, and by the means of which each one, while uniting with all, nevertheless obeys only himself and remains as free as before” (Rousseau 432). Although Rousseau’s plan pledges to protect individual liberty, the plan rests on the legislation of the “general will” and the successful unity of a “body politic,” both of which are vaguely defined and become too concerned with state interest.
Civil Society has become one the most important features of the Morden State, whether operate independently or cooperated by the state. The primary role for the civil society is to limit the control of power by the state but more often now more civil society organisations have been co-opted into the state. This move has been criticized as it is view as that the state only do it to advance its own interest. Starting off with the idea of civil as state society, Marx does not go with the idea that it is the state that creates and sustains civil society. Below some of Marx criticism of this idea by different scholars in discussed.
Jean-Jacques Rousseau presents the fascinating notion that human beings are born into the world with an inherently good nature. Nonetheless, this morality turns cold and dark within the steel bars of society. The heavy rules of civilization produce the long, iron chains that corrupt the goodness inside the souls and bodies of mankind. According to SparkNotes, “Rousseau believed modern man’s enslavement to his own needs was responsible for all sorts of societal ills, from exploitation and domination of others to poor self-esteem and depression” (“The Necessity of Freedom”). The philosopher’s intuitive thoughts can be summarized in his quote, “Civilization is a hopeless race to discover remedies for the evils it produces” (“Jean-Jacques Rousseau Quotes.”)
To start, the basic premise for Rousseau is the movement from the state of nature to civil society is a movement ultimately to a significantly worse situation. Furthermore, the current state in the state of nature leaves us well provided without the help of each other, “it is in fact impossible to conceive why, in a state of nature, one man should stand more in need of the assistance of another” (Discourse, 1, 423). We could also say, humans in the state of nature are self-sufficient. Also, there is no moral relations nor is there obligation between one another, yet there is a desire for self-preservation as well as a motivation for morality in the state of nature. There is no such thing as vanity, esteem, contempt, or private property. In other words, because there are no relations between people, we have not developed self-love or esteem as no interaction has occurred. But, our natural compassion enables us to feel pain when we see others in distress – this is seen quite frequently in parents and in animals (Discourse, 1, 424). From this, we can conclude that compassion in the state of nature is more effective than laws and moral principles that we would see in a civil society. Though there is no reason for anyone to leave the state of nature, the role of private property plays a huge part in moving us away from the state of nature and into civil society, “the first man who say,
John Locke’s social contract theory applies to all types of societies in any time era. Although, Jean-Jacques Rousseau did write during the Renaissance era, his philosophy limits itself to fix the problem of an absolute monarchy and fails to resolve other types of societies. These philosophers have such profound impacts on modern day societies. For example, the United States’ general will is codified in the Constitution and Bill of Rights, meanwhile individual rights are distinguished in the Declaration of
This chapter began by introducing the concept of a civil society. Chirico (128) described it as people organising outside of government channels to meet social objectives. She pointed out that social movements in the past have focused on communities within nations while the current movements focus more on involving people from diverse parts of the world in order to promote human welfare regardless of where in the World they happen to be. Chirico shared a quote from Simmel (128) that really resonated with me and, in my opinion, captured such a complex concept into a short and simple sentence. He said that “Humanity is the collective life, the same people who from other perspective are organized into societies, polities economies, families, and so on”. I take this to mean that we are all, basically, the same; we are all humans who are trying to make it through whatever life we have been given to live. People are just people. I think the concept of civil society is one that I wish more people would understand and embrace instead of holding on to prejudice, judgement, and ignorance. According to Chirico (128), individuals who help do so out of a sense of shared experience by recognising that everyone is a victim of global problems and that anyone can help. There are endless ways to participate whether it be through a formal organisation such as NGO’s, The Red Cross, Doctors Without Borders, and The Peace Corps, through non-profit organisations and advocacy, or more individually by making donations, sponsoring a child, mentoring, volunteering in their communities. These are regular people who volunteer, and sometimes risk their lives, to fight for equal rights and treatment for all.
From elementary to high school and even college students are compelled to attend school all around the world. In schools students not only learn general education but learn a lot about themselves. It is said that in the first twenty years of an individual’s life are the years that the individual finds out who they really are. An individual’s moral beliefs are one of the most personal and complex pieces of that individual. There are several great moral theories that could be taught in school, but to only choose one is very difficult. Some of the most known moral theories are Utilitarianism, Virtue Ethics, Kantianism and even Social Contract Theory. All of these theories were developed by some of the most incredible philosophers of all time.
Social change and the law are codependent. If one wishes to see progress in the world, a world crippled with corruption, ignorance, fear, and hate amongst other injustices, he or she must acknowledge the relationship that law and social change have on one another. Social change requires a shift in the mindset of a collective body. It requires the norms of a culture to gradually change and progress with the values of the evolving society in order for change to happen. Laws change over time as the society’s values evolve. Thus, new laws come about when values change and conversely, laws change or progress when values change or progress. Laws create social change as social change creates law. The relationship is cyclical.
Civil society is both a way of describing aspects of modern society and an aspiration, an ideal of what a good society should be like. It has recently been revived to emphasize the capacity of societies to organize themselves through the active cooperation of their members. Unfortunately up to today we still don't have a universally recognised definition and the whole concept is still the core of a intense academic debate. That is why it seemed appropriate, for the purpouse of this paper, to analyse the historical evolution of the concept throughout the centuries.