Social Contract theory is a philosophical theory that states that morality comprises of the rules that oversee people’s behavior that rational individuals accept if others also accept the rules as well. According to IEP (2019), social contract theory is thought to go as far back as the philosopher Socrates. In time other philosophers developed the theory further.
Thomas Hobbes 1588- 1679 was a man that lived in England during a time described as the English Civil War. Hobbes decided to create a theory that would be at par with the discoveries being made in the scientific world. He argued that the social contract was necessary because humans are exclusively self-interested (IEP, 2019). The reason for this is that men in the State of Nature see themselves as equals that must fight for everything they desire to own. As a result, there is a great need for the social contract.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The social contract applies the ability of men to be reasonable and accept the laws of nature. These laws suggest that one should accept peace if others do and should also accept war if people decide to do so. In order to accept this notion, a Social Contract can be setup to stipulate two things (IEP, 2019). Firstly, that man should accept to renounce the rights they have against each other in the State of Nature. Also, they must install a person or a group of persons into a position of authority and power. The authority figure would then enforce the first part of the contract. To get away from the life offered by the State of Nature men must agree to be governed by common law and have a system that enforces these laws (IEP, 2019). The social contract is therefore necessary because it is a key aspect that keeps men from returning to the State of Nature.
The Social Contract is applicable in areas of everyday life such as its relation to the Prisoners Dilemma. This is a game discovered by game theorists who wanted to test the possibility of nuclear warfare across continents (Rothstein, 2000). The game pits two partners against each other by giving them outcomes that either favor or disadvantage them. Rothstein (2000) further states that the two must then choose to either act in their own interest or in the interest of the agency they were affiliated to. The former means that the partner is disadvantaged while the latter means that both parties suffer the same consequences. The author also explains that the relation between the dilemma and the theory is that the men will reason and often choose the option that works in their greatest self-interest returning to the days of the State of Nature (Rothstein, 2000). This causes society to become chaotic and thus the need for society to constantly choose to live by the Social Contract.
Still in line with the social contract theory is Kant’s support for capital punishment. Kant defended capital punishment with the justification that judicial punishments must first be imposed on those deserving punishment (Rothstein, 2000). The Law of Retribution, (jus talionis) thereafter determines the level of punishment given to the criminal. Therefore, a person found guilty of murder should then receive a punishment equal to the crime committed (Potter, 2002). This he believed would be the only thing that would fulfill the requirements of justice. His argument is therefore rooted in “the principle of equality” that determines that the crime and punishment must be in tandem with each other.
References
IEP (2019) Social Contract Theory retrieved https://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/
Potter, N. T. (2002). Kant and capital punishment today. The Journal of value inquiry, 36(2), 267-282.
Rothstein, B. (2000). Trust, social dilemmas and collective memories. Journal of Theoretical Politics, 12(4), 477-501.
Skyrms, B. (2014). Evolution of the social contract. Cambridge University Press.
