A comparison of thomas hobbes and jean jacques rousseau on the social contract

Social Contract Theory

Thomas Hobbes stood out among the four philosophers in that he believed that a strong absolute monarchy was the best form of government. Given this, it would be difficult to overestimate the effect that social contract theory has had, both within philosophy, and on the wider culture.

So, government gets established, through a contract, which purports to guarantee equality and protection for all, even though its true purpose is to fossilize the very inequalities that private property has produced.

Human life was thus no longer "a war of all against all". Rousseau propounded that state, law and the government are interchangeable, but this in present senerio is different.

An absolute monarchy did not regard in those rights, so they could not protect them for the people in the society. And so when men have both done and suffered injustice and have had experience of both, not being able to avoid the one and obtain the other, they think that they had better agree among themselves to have neither; hence there arise laws and mutual covenants; and that which is ordained by law is termed by them lawful and just.

Hobbes concept of absolutism is totally a vague concept in present scenario. Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Baron de Montesquieu, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau were all political philosophers that debated the question of who was best fit to control the government.

His theory was that in order to secure a peaceful and orderly society, people formed a social contract with an absolute ruler that would sacrifice individual liberties for the good of the whole.

No, that would mean but the continuation of [Rousseau's] idea. So in the end, although Plato is perhaps the first philosopher to offer a representation of the argument at the heart of social contract theory, Socrates ultimately rejects the idea that social contract is the original source of justice.

Thomas Hobbes believes that humans are born selfish and egotistical, and believes in an absolute monarchy.

What are the differences between John Locke's and Rousseau's philosophies?

The principles that persons in the Original Position, behind the Veil of Ignorance, would choose to regulate a society at the most basic level that is, prior even to a Constitution are called by Rawls, aptly enough, the Two Principles of Justice.

So, for example, when one tills a piece of land in nature, and makes it into a piece of farmland, which produces food, then one has a claim to own that piece of land and the food produced upon it.

Justice is the state of a well-regulated soul, and so the just man will also necessarily be the happy man. This inevitably leads to a situation where there is no right nor wrong and men live in perpetual fear of one another.

John Locke For Hobbes, the necessity of an absolute authority, in the form of a Sovereign, followed from the utter brutality of the State of Nature. He cannot protect himself from outside dangers; therefore, he needs sovereign power for survival.

In other words, we cannot decide to forgo some of our civil liberties in favor of greater economic advantage.

Both SMs and CMs are exclusively self-interested and rational, but they differ with regard to whether they take into account only strategies, or both the strategies and utilities, of whose with whom they interact.

Compare and contrast Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau.

Conclusion Virginia Held has argued that "Contemporary Western society is in the grip of contractual thinking" He rules out a representative form of government. For Hobbes, man became much happier after getting rid of his natural state, because his life was based on peace and order.

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon — advocated a conception of social contract that did not involve an individual surrendering sovereignty to others. The majority was accepted on the belief that majority view is right than minority view.The State of Nature: Thomas Hobbes and Jean Jacques Rousseau Natural state of man has been one of the major themes in political philosophy for centuries.

This is because the discussion over the state of nature reveals the underlying reasons why man has had to establish political societies according. Social, Economic and Political Thought Notes Part II Notes (Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, JEAN-JACQUES ROUSSEAU, J.S.

MILL) THE SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY The State-of-Nature Teachings of Hobbes and Locke5/5(6). Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau Essay - Thomas Hobbes and Jean-Jacques Rousseau have very different views on the social contract largely based on their fundamental views of the state of nature in humanity.

Jan 12,  · Among those thinkers were the philosophers Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean Jacques Rousseau who all differ in the manner in which they view human nature.

Thomas Hobbes (), an English philospher, believed that all humans are egotistical and selfish. Nov 07,  · Although the concept of the social contract is recognizable in the works of some of the ancient Greek philosophers, and Rousseau was the first to coin the term “social contract”, Thomas Hobbes is widely recognized to be the founder of social contract theory in western philosophy.

Aug 12,  · thinkers such as Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Of particular interest are the works of Hobbes, The Leviathan and J.J. Rousseau, The Social Contract.

A comparison of thomas hobbes and jean jacques rousseau on the social contract
Rated 5/5 based on 51 review