The Social Contract Theory

The legitimacy of a government is validated only so long as the terms that were agreed upon among the people being governed before its creation are upheld to its fullest extent. This agreement is commonly known as the social contract. Since the ancient Athenian civilizations and throughout history we see this term being discussed and debated on by multiple scholarly figures. As a result of these discussions, this term has been ever evolving. Even to this day, its legacy is easily identifiable in and plays a huge role on our governmental circumstances and general way of life.

To understand the term of social contract we must first understand where its legitimacy to arise as a political theory comes from. As of today, we consider government a permanent structure, a system that has been there constantly for many years. However we must ask ourselves why do we even have government in the first place, when does this idea of government become a reality and what held together a society of peoples before the existence of a governmental system.

The reason government arises is for the mere issue of solving what is known as the collective action problem. This problem arises as a group of people acting rationally with regards to their own personal and individual interests, as a result, causes an unfavorable & irrational outcome for the population as whole. This resulting problem, which affects most people in a society, is too massive for only one person to resolve, and no single person is incentivized to solve it on his own. Thus, a government is formed by and in representation of the people in order to solve the collective action problems that may arise among them. However, it is the way and the terms under which this government gains its legitimacy that make way for the social contract theory.

The theory states that the people give up some of their individual sovereignties and liberties in name of the government in order for it to serve in the common good of its citizens. The main ideas of the contract are better defined by saying that “Social contract theory expresses …that the idea that “will” and not “force” is the basis of government; and the value of justice or the idea that “right” and not “might” is the basis of all political society and of every system of political order.”¹Other than this, one of the main objectives of the social contract theory is “to attempt to explain why we should, most of the time, obey governmental laws and authority”²

Various scholars throughout history have had many discussions with regards to what terms constitute a social contract. Just as well, many have criticized the very purpose of developing and practicing such a theory.

Perhaps the first of many great scholars to truly set up the idea of a social contract was Plato. Through his dialogue in the book “Crito” he lets us know that “he who has experience of the manner in which we order justice and administer the State, and still remains, has entered into an implied contract that he will do as we command him.”³ In other words, he tells us that if you have lived up to the point where you recognize the rules of the state and still decide to live there, to educate yourself there, to develop your family there, then you have to abide to the state’s rules and follow them to the fullest extent. He swears loyalty to the social contract to the extent that, if you break the law and find yourself under penalty of death, just as he found himself at the time he spoke the previous words, you must accept death gracefully as you are morally obliged to obey the contract and its terms, regardless of your opinion in relation to the “justness” of the law. As of Plato, the social contract is sacred and cannot be broken even if you think the laws are unjust, the only remedy Plato mentions against a contract one does not agree with is that “he who wants to go to a colony or to any other city, may go where he likes, and take his goods with him.”⁴

One of the greatest exponents of the social contract theory is John Locke. Through his book, “The Second Treatise on Government” he wrote one of the most elaborate definitions of the social contract theory. He argued that before government existed there was a state of nature, a period of time before government, in which people acted based on their individual self-interest. In this state, he says, humans live peacefully “with a title to perfect freedom, and an uncontrouled enjoyment of all the rights and privileges of the law of nature.”⁵ John Locke epitomizes the reason why we organize ourselves politically by saying that “as we are not by ourselves sufficient to furnish ourselves with… a life fit for the dignity of man… we are naturally induced to seek communion and fellowship with others.”⁶ He specifies that this treaty is one established by “the mutual consent of those who make up the community”⁷ in order “to preserve the members of that society in their lives, liberties, and possessions.”⁸ Lastly he specifies that if there happens to be grave mistakes from part of the rulers, the people have the power to rebel, remove them from power and “put the rule into such hands which may secure to them the ends for which government was at first erected.”⁹

Other scholars, such as Thomas Hobbes set up a version in criticism of the original social contract theory, by disregarding the period before government existed and stating that politics and the state were natural and that they had always existed among society. He states that although this state of nature never existed, it is being lived today by some savage groups and that this brutal behavior is how people act without the contract: “there was never such a time nor condition of war as this; and I believe it was never generally so, over all the world: but there are many places where they live so now. For the savage people in many places of America, have no government at all, and live at this day in that brutish manner.”¹⁰This version of the State of Nature is much more pessimistic than the one explained by Locke, in which everyone lived peacefully before government. Other then this, he sets up a monarch-centered version of the social contract, as “Political sovereignty, was situated with the rulers and not the people. Monarchs were sovereign; they had political power, not the people, and therefore the people had no ability to limit an abusive ruler.”¹¹ Hobbes, further in defense of the monarchs stated “The only way to build a common power is to entrust the power and strength to one man”¹²

Another famous critic of some of the common components of a social contract theory is David Hume. His theory of social contract agrees with most in the sense that they start off as a contract explicitly specifying the terms of it and that the citizens must follow it under any and all circumstances. However, it differs from it in one way, as he believes that a social contract evolves over time and transcends its legitimacy from a signed contract to more of a moral obligation. He believes that “though the duty of allegiance be at first grafted on the obligation of promises, and be for some time supported by that obligation, it quickly takes root of itself, and has an original obligation and authority, independent of all contracts”¹³

The theory of Social Contract, although one of the most important foundations of modern day society, has been greatly disputed throughout the ages by some of the most prominent scholars mankind has ever known. From the origins of the theory found in Plato’s writings, to its conceptual development under Locke’s treatise, we see the convincing arguments created in support of the social contract. On the other hand, many famous thinkers such as Hobbes and Hume have enacted convincing arguments that seem to prove those versions created by other exponents, totally wrong. Regardless of how much this concept has been discussed and disputed throughout history, it has been the basis used to shape most if not all of the greatest political entities that have governed our nations.  Our current form of government, the liberties we enjoy under it, and the natural rights we most defend, are all a reality due to non other than the social contract theory and the philosophical giants who evolved the concept through time.  

Works Cited:

1.     Ishiyama, John. Breuning, Marijke. 21^st Century Political Science. New York: Sage Publications, 2010.

2.     Bennett, William. The Social Contract. Debate.uvm.edu. Web. September 24^th, 2013.

3.     Baird, Forrest E. From Plato to Derrida. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2011.      Print.

4.     Baird, Forrest E. From Plato to Derrida. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall, 2011.      Print.

5.     Locke, John. Second Treatise of Government. Hollywood: Simon & Brown, 2011. Print

6.     Locke, John. Second Treatise of Government. Hollywood: Simon & Brown, 2011. Print

7.     Locke, John. Second Treatise of Government. Hollywood: Simon & Brown, 2011. Print

8.     Locke, John. Second Treatise of Government. Hollywood: Simon & Brown, 2011. Print

9.     Locke, John. Second Treatise of Government. Hollywood: Simon & Brown, 2011. Print

10.  Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. United States: Pacific Publishing Studio, 2011. Print.

11.  Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. United States: Pacific Publishing Studio, 2011. Print.

12.  Hobbes, Thomas. Leviathan. United States: Pacific Publishing Studio, 2011. Print.

13.  Hume, David. Treatise on Human Nature. United Sates: Jonathan Bennett, 2008. Electronic.