Title:

Social Contract Theory

Overview:

This module introduces the students to the Social Contract Theory as one of the
ethical/moral frameworks that are dealt with in the study of ethics and as a theory that explains
the creation and existence of society and of the standards of morals. It discusses the basic
concepts and tenets of the theory, its ancient and modern origins, and the formulations of this
theory by its known proponent and advocates specifically Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and
Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

Learning Outcomes:

At the end of this module, the students are expected to:

1. Discuss Social Contract Theory as a Moral Philosophy.

2. Distinguish the different formulations of Social Contract Theory according to its known
advocates.
3. Illustrate how Social Contract Theory is present in the society.

Content:

Social Contract Theory

Social Contract is a theory that originated in the early period of the Modern Era of
Philosophy which is also called as the age of enlightenment. This is also said to exist already
during the early Greek period of Philosophy or otherwise known as the Ancient Era of
Philosophy through the writings of Plato about his master, Socrates. Social Contract Theory is
defined as a branch of both political philosophy and of moral philosophy which claims that a
person’s political or moral obligations are dependent upon an agreement or contract in a
society in which where a person lives. The premise or starting argument to this theory is that
human condition is originally free of any laws or any governing body that limits and regulates
the behavior of any person and that this person is basically free to do anything and is self-
motivated. Because of this condition, humanity tends to be chaotic since everyone is free to do
what they seem best for their self-interests. As a solution for this condition, people come
together and that these people gave their consent willingly whether expressly or silently to the
people vested with authority by the individuals in a society or to the majority will to surrender
some of their rights and freedoms in exchange for their own protection, interests, social order,
and of their remaining rights. It is mostly associated with Thomas Hobbes as the one who
popularized this theory and where followed by other more significant figures like John Locke,
Jean-Jacques Rousseau, and John Rawls.

The Social Contract theory is a well-established theory in politics and is familiar to those
who are studying politics and government as it studies the legitimacy of political authority, the
obligations of rulers and of subjects on a premised contract/s. This may be studied more in
social sciences, especially in political science; however, this theory is undeniably moral in nature
since it concerns itself about political and moral obligation of a person in the society. You have
learned in the past lesson about the first moral framework that was given to you in this Ethics
course, which is the Natural Law, that human laws are or should be based on the precepts of
natural laws and that these natural laws are also sources of morality. Also, even in the study of
Law, a law student takes a course about the relationship of morality and the law. Thus, Social
Contract Theory not only concerns itself with politics and political obligations of a person, but
also the moral obligations of persons and thus forms part of Moral Philosophy.

Ancient Greek Origin

In a dialogue written by Plato, Socrates and his friend Crito talked in Socrates’s prison
cell where Crito convinces him to escape from his prison and to escape his death penalty.
Socrates, at that time, was accused of two charges: corrupting the minds of the youth by his
teachings and introducing a god who is different from the gods introduced by the state and was
therefore sentenced to death. Socrates denied the proposition of Crito of escaping and going
into a pleasant exile at the expense of his friends and made an argument as to why he must
stay in prison and accept the death penalty. He explained that he has an obligation to obey
what the laws are since it has made people’s way of life possible and the existence of his very
being. The laws or the society that created them made it possible for his mother and father to
marry and have children, including Socrates himself. They lived in the city of Athens and
followed its laws which required his father to care and educate his children. They have lived
according to the laws and the dictates of society and have flourished as human beings. This
dependency and obedience of him and the people to the laws of the society, according to him,
is not coerced. Individuals, once they have grown up and have seen how society works and
conducts itself, can choose whether to leave, taking their property with them, or to stay.
Staying implies an agreement to abide by the Laws and accept the punishments that they mete
out. And, having made an agreement that is itself just, Socrates asserts that he must keep to
this agreement that he has made and obey the laws of society by staying and accepting the
death penalty. In this case, the contract described by Socrates is an implicit one: it is implied by
his choice to stay in Athens, even though he is free to leave.

This argument of Socrates depicts his idea of an agreement of individuals to form a

society with a governing authority to create specific guidelines on how to conduct one’s self in
the society in which they created to ensure their own rights and protection. When one enters
into contract and lives in that society, he will be bound to the laws and at the same time gain
protection but when one violates the laws; he shall be subject to punishment as a way of
maintaining social order. This already is an early formulation and introduction of the Social
Contract Theory.

Modern Proponents

Thomas Hobbes

Thomas Hobbes (1588 – 1679) is the first modern philosopher who advocated and
elaborated the social contract theory in his opus magnum, Leviathan, published in 1651. His
premise is that human nature is necessarily self-interested, human persons want and pursue
things what they think to be beneficial to their selves and to their interests. They are easily
drawn to what is desirable and repelled by the opposite. Everything a person does is motivated
by self-interests and is only concerned with his own self. According to him, even the reason that
parents care for their children is still self-interests of the parents, that is, after they care and
educate their children, the children will feel indebted to them and they will receive something
as return for the gratitude of their children. Aside from the self-motivated nature of human
person, Hobbes also claims that humans are rational, that is, humans have the capacity or
means to reasonably achieve their desires. This is what Hobbes called the ‘State of Nature’ or
the natural state of man (human person).

These being the premises of Hobbes, he continues to argue that the reason for
being subjected to political authority and the justification of political obligation to the subjects
is this: “men (human persons) are naturally self-interested, yet they are rational, they will
choose to submit to the authority of a Sovereign in order to be able to live in a civil society,
which is conducive to their own interests”. Hobbes proposes this justification by imagining men
in their natural state, or in the State of Nature. In the State of Nature, men are naturally self-
interested, they are equal to one another, there are limited resources, and yet there is no
power able to force men to cooperate. Given these conditions in the State of Nature, Hobbes
concludes that the State of Nature would be poor, solitary, and brutal. In this State of Nature,
all persons are always in fear of losing their life to another; there is no assurance of long-term
enjoyment of their needs and desires; no long-term and complex cooperation is possible
because the State of Nature is described as a state of selfishness and chaos.

But there is a way to solve and avoid the problematic situation that the State of
Nature can bring.  The first and most important thing must be that “each man be willing to
pursue peace when others are willing to do the same.” Being reasonable can construct a Social
Contract that can give persons a life other than that available to them in the State of Nature.
This social contract is constituted by two distinguishable contracts. First, individuals must agree
to establish a society by collectively renouncing some of the rights they had in the State of
Nature. Second, they must give some persons or one person or an assembly of persons with the
authority and power to enforce the contract and to ensure the protection of the subjects. In
other words, to turn away from the State of Nature, human persons must agree to live together
under common laws, and establish an authority (which Hobbes also calls as the sovereign) that
will enforce the social contract and the laws that constitute it. Since the sovereign is vested
with the authority and power to carry out punishments for breaches of the contract, men have
good reason, even though self-motivated, to adjust and conduct themselves according to the
morality of the society.

Because of this social contract, morality; politics; society; and everything that comes
along with it, are purely conventional or just agreed upon by the people themselves. Prior to
the existence of the social contract, nothing is immoral or unjust; all men are free to according
to their self-interests. After these contracts are established, however, then society becomes
possible, and people can be expected to keep their promises and to cooperate with one
another.

John Locke

John Locke (1632 – 1704) is another modern philosopher who is a well-known

proponent of empiricism, a philosophical school of thought which claims that all knowledge and
ideas are attained only through the senses, and an advocate of the social contract theory and
followed the methodology of Hobbes by starting off with the natural state of man. The State of
Nature according to Locke, however, is different from that of Hobbes. The State of Nature of
man is a state of complete freedom and liberty where all men are free do whatever they deem
to be good for them. But this state of complete liberty and freedom does not necessarily permit
a person to harm another just because he is free, in Locke’s natural state, he argues that
persons are governed by Law of Nature, that there is also in the human nature that orders them
not to harm others and that persons, even without a government, see themselves equal and
have a morality. It is described as pre-political but not pre-moral. Law of Nature, according to
Locke, is given to us by God, and has the same precepts as the Natural Law like sanctity of life,
survival of the specie, etc. The State of Nature according Locke is quite peaceful than that of
Hobbes, but the state of nature of Locke can become problematic when the concept of
property is introduced to man. When property is introduced to man in the state of nature and
dispute occurs over the property, chaos comes in since there is no regulating and interfering
authority in this state.

Locke claims the State of Nature is not a condition of individuals, like what is described
by Hobbes. “Rather, it is populated by mothers and fathers with their children, or families –
what he calls “conjugal society””. Conjugal societies are based on the voluntary agreements to
care for children together, and they are moral but not political. “Political society” comes into
being when individual men, representing their families, come together in the State of Nature
and agree to each other to give up the power to punish those who transgress the Law of
Nature, and give that power to the public power or a government. Consequently, these men
and conjugal societies become subject to the will of the majority or of the political society. In
other words, by making a compact to leave the State of Nature and form society, they make
one society under one authority and submit themselves to the will and laws of that society.
What consist as right or wrong behaviors depend to the agreement of the people in the created
society.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712 – 1778) is another modern philosopher who is known as a

proponent who popularized the social contract theory among others through his work Du
Contrat Social (The Social Contract). His starting point is the same with the two previous
proponents and almost all of the social contract advocates, wherein he started off stating that
the State of Nature of a human person is free, living a simple uncomplicated life, easily satisfied
by the abundance of nature, and living in solitary, which means the population then was low
and that people rarely see each other and tend not to harm others. But as time passed by, the
population increased, people cannot enjoy the resources by themselves anymore, and the way
of life drastically changed and property was introduced. Because of these changes,
competitions and disputes occurred, people departed from the State of Nature.

Human beings are essentially free in the State of Nature, but the ‘progress’ of civilization
has substituted freedom with dependence and economic and social inequalities, and the extent
to which persons judge themselves by comparing their selves with others. Since a return to the
State of Nature is impossible, the fundamental philosophical problem that The Social Contract,
the treatise made by Rousseau, seeks to address: “how can we be free and live together? Or,
put another way, how can we live together without succumbing to the force and coercion of
others?” According to Rousseau, it can be done by submission of individual wills to the
collective will or of the majority created through agreement with other free and equal persons.
Like Hobbes and Locke before him, Rousseau believes that all men are made by nature to be
equals, “therefore no one has a natural right to govern others, and therefore the only justified
authority is the authority that is generated out of agreements or covenants.”

To sum it up, Rousseau’s social contract theory points out that human persons are
essentially free and equal with each other. But this natural state was changed because of
progress of the civilization. The only way to live peacefully and morally outside the State of
Nature is to come together and form a single society where individual interests are renounced
for the common benefit or the will of the majority that is directed towards common good.

Important Keywords:

1. Social Contract - branch of both political philosophy and of moral philosophy which
claims that a person’s political or moral obligations are dependent upon an expressed or
implied agreement or contract of the members of a society.
2. State of Nature – a pre-social contract state of human persons as naturally self-
motivated, self-interested, and free.
3. Sovereign – a person or a group of people vested with authority and power by the
society to enforce the contract, protect the society, and carry out punishments.
4. Social Convention – a theory in ethics which claims that morals are just things agreed
upon by people.
5. Conjugal Society – a society composed of a mother, a father, and their children.
6. Political Society - a society composed of different conjugal societies.

Activity:
Essay. Answer the following questions concisely but not in less than two sentences.

1. Why is Social Contract Theory a moral philosophy? 5 points

2. Discuss the following’s formulation of the social contract theory:

a. Hobbes (5 pts)

b. Locke (5 pts)

c. Rousseau (5pts)

3. Give a situation in our present events that illustrates the necessity or relevance of the

Social Contract Theory in the society. 10 points

References:

Bertram, Christopher. Rousseau and the Social Contract. New York: Routledge, 2004.
Lessnoff, Michael. Readings in Social and Political Theory: Social Contract Theory. New York:
New York University Press, 1990.
Timmerman, Peter. Moral Contract Theory and Social Cognition. Netherlands: Springer
International Publishing, 2014.
Friend, Celeste.(n.d.). Social Contract Theory. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. From
https://iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/