Introduction
The way individuals from a specific geographical area behave is influenced by profound factors including values that they embrace, beliefs and the existence of other people with totally varied preferences among many other reasons. On the other hand, society has been at the core of dictating ways in which individuals should carry themselves around facilitating a culture and outlined norms meant to direct the people in question. In addition, politics and the government have also played a significant role in shaping ethical practices amongst its citizens through the implementation of policies meant to govern and direct (Rachels & Rachel, 2005). The formulation of the legislature in most countries is meant to facilitate order and tame people from committing vices that breach the rights of others. Furthermore, these policies are geared towards ensuring that the government exercises its authority over its citizens. Contrary to this, citizens have the rights to fully live according to how they feel obliged to and participate in the aspect of democracy where their voice is also viable (Cudd, 2012). It is within these elements that some legislations are felt as strict restriction towards citizens yet they have a voice on what they are able to do according to their desires or preferences. On the other hand, it is ironical considering that most countries are constitutionally addressing that their citizens are at liberty to freely live and express themselves as desired for as long as they are not violating the rights of others.
The helmet laws globally are implemented to restrict motorcyclists from riding without head protection. The wearing of a helmet is geared towards ensuring that the cyclists are not endangered in case they are involved in an accident. Besides motorcyclists, some countries are also implementing the helmet laws on bicycle riders. While it may feel like a concern to its citizens, the restrictions hinder some individuals from cycling at their own desired style with or without a helmet. On the other hand, it is an exercise of power over the citizen controlling some of their choices. It is in the position of the citizen to decide what they find suitable in their eyes rather than being directed by a higher power, which on the other hand imposes fines in case the set rules are not adhered to. While it may feel oppressive to follow rules that do not favor one’s preferences or choices, the government proves it authority by ensuring that the citizens who fail to comply are arrested and pressed charged against them. Besides, many times the individuals who are caught without helmets are asked to pay hefty fines mainly to ensure that others do not break the rules and also to ensure that the very individuals do not repeat the same mistakes.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
In the aspect of social contract theory, it is basically the way individuals in a society relate to the rules and regulations that are implemented to govern them. Furthermore, it describes why they are legible to live under rules and outline reasons they need (Kemerling, 2011). According to Thomas Hobbes, a society under no rules is considered as a menacing place to live (Lyod, 2014). On the other hand, the people may be at liberty to exercise activities that would not only subject them on a risky place but other individuals around them. The description of Hobbes of a society without regulations is of living or associating with a ‘state of nature.’ Contrary to Hobbes’ ideology, Rousseau argues that the ‘general will’ has more power over some political ideologies making it difficult for political aspects and the role of democracy to be sustained (Bertram, 2010). Rousseau emphasizes that finding ways of ensuring that the general will is put into consideration rather than the interest of an individual sustaining more importance to the community. On the other hand, his ideology criticizes the way a set of individuals can come up and control a larger group through laws that were not in any way considered to involve the general parties. Rousseau argues that the welfare of the general individuals is far better than the smaller group who are in the higher positions to control implementation of the legislature.
Both Hobbes’ and Rousseau’s theories favor the society in one way or the other. The advantage of Thomas Hobbes theory is to ensure that the citizens or a specific community are in-line with the set rules controlling possible occurrences of criminal activities hence reducing arrests and incarcerations. Furthermore, as mentioned earlier, rules in a society ensure that there is order and maintain sanity amongst citizens. The existence of a sovereign power that has authority in outlining policies facilitates the respect and ability for individuals to be responsible for making outlined choices within their societies (Wenar, 2012). On the other hand, it is fundamental for the citizens since the liberty to express oneself will not be misused by individuals. On the contrary, Hobbes’ theory denies citizens to live according to their designated values, desires, preferences and culture. Furthermore, some rules are meant to suppress rather than build the welfare of the people who are controlled (Ethics Updates, 2012). As for the case of the helmet laws, individuals who find it fun to cycle without a helmet which probably hinders them from enjoying the breeze or some scenery on their sides are subjected to strict restrictions that totally violate their freedom. The question of democracy in most democratic countries is therefore void and useless since the voice of people who would prefer cycling without a helmet is not in any way considered. Yes, citizens are great resources to any country since they contribute to the growth and development of it; but their welfare that includes acting in ways they prefer should be a concern to the government.
The significance of Rousseau’s theory is the ability of a larger group of individuals being in a position to control rules that can be implemented to govern them. The general will and their desires come first ensuring that a very small group of individual adheres to the set regulations either voluntarily or involuntarily. Furthermore, the ideology of Rousseau favors a larger group which according to him is more democratic since it is the welfare of individuals that has been put into consideration rather than the authority of a set of people. On the other hand, this theory facilitates the ability of societies to live without being biased over certain groups on the basis of particular factors. On the contrary, Rousseau’s theory contributes to the general will to be defiant over authorities creating the development of rebellion (Ethics Updates, 2010). This, on the other hand, facilitates the existence of lack of governance and division since with time different groups would always consider taking up higher positions primarily to control the general will’s choice.
Conclusion
The existence of policies and governance has existed since time in memorial and for longtime facilitated ways in which people live and act. As a result, societies have no choice but to adhere to the rules set to dictate their activities. While it may be convenient to facilitate order thought the implementation of rules, some only exist to deny citizens the opportunity of embracing a suitable and preferred way of acting. For this reason, various social and political scholars and analysts have formulated theories that highlight various indicators of what is expected in the society.
References
Rachels, J., & Rachels, S. (2015). The elements of moral philosophy (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Kemerling, G. (2011). Hobbes' s Leviathan the Philosophy Pages. Retrieved from http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/3x.htm#mech
Kemerling, G. (2011). The Enlightenment: Continental the Philosophy Pages. Retrieved from http://www.philosophypages.com/hy/5d.htm#contr
Cudd, A. (2012, August 2). Contractarianism. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/contractarianism/
Lloyd, S. A. (2014, February 25). Hobbes' s moral and political philosophy: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hobbes-moral/Bertram, C. (2010, September 27). Jean Jacques Rousseau the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rousseau/
Wenar, L. (2012, September 24). John Rawls the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rawls/
Ethics Updates. (2012, March 19). Abortion and ethics. Retrieved from http://ethicsupdates.net/applied/abortion/index.shtml
Ethics Updates. (2010, November 2). Poverty and welfare. Retrieved from http://ethicsupdates.net/applied/poverty/index.shtml
Ethics Updates. (2010, November 2). Gender and ethical theory. Retrieved from http://ethicsupdates.net/applied/gender/identity/index.shtml
