Social Contract Theory

Submitted to Mr. Kamal Narayan

(Subject: Political Science)

Submitted by Anant Ekka

Section A

Roll No: 26

Semester I

B.A.LL.B (Hons.)

Submitted on: 28/04/2018

HIDAYATULLAH NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY, RAIPUR (C.G.)

1
 Acknowledgement
The successful completion of any task would be, but incomplete, without the mention of
people who made it possible and whose constant guidance and encouragement crowned my
effort with success.

I would like to thank my course teacher Mr. Kamal Narayan for providing me the topic of my
interest.

Secondly, I would like to thank our Vice Chancellor for providing the best possible facilities
of I.T and library in the university.

I would also like to extend my warm and sincere thanks to all my colleagues, who
contributed in numerable ways in the accomplishment of this project.

Thanking you,

Anant Ekka
Semester I

2
 Table of contents

1. Introduction.............................................................................................................4
2. Objectives................................................................................................................5
3. Research Methodology............................................................................................5
4. Chapterisation
I. What is social contract theory................ .............................................................6
II. Analysis of theory of social contract by Thomas Hobbes...................................7
III Analysis of theory of social contract by John Locke...........................................8
IV Analysis of theory of social contract by Jean Jack Rousseau.............................10
5. Conclusion.............................................................................................................11
6. Webliography..........................................................................................................12

3
 Introduction

Social contract theory, nearly as old as philosophy itself, is the view that persons' moral
and/or political obligations are dependent upon a contract or agreement among them to form
the society in which they live.

However, social contract theory is rightly associated with modern moral and political theory
and is given its first full exposition and defense by Thomas Hobbes. After Hobbes, John
Locke and Jean-Jacques Rousseau are the best known proponents of this enormously
influential theory, which has been one of the most dominant theories within moral and
political theory throughout the history of the modern West.

The social contract theory throws light on the origin of the society. According to this theory
all men are born free and equal. Society came into existence because of the agreement
entered into by the individuals. The classical representatives of this school of thought are
Thomas Hobbes, John Locke and Jean Jack Rousseau.

4
 Research methodology
The researcher has adopted descriptive method. The sources of data are books, articles, blogs,
websites, legal databases, online journals, acts, etc.

Objectives
1. What is social contract theory?
2. State of nature by Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau.
3. Critical analysis of this theory.

5
 What is Social Contract Theory?
The concept of social contract theory is that in the beginning man lived in the state of nature.
They had no government and there was no law to regulate them. There were hardships and
oppression on the sections of the society. To overcome from these hardships they entered into
two agreements which are:

1. “Pactum Unionis”; and

2. “Pactum Subjectionis”.

By the first pact of unionis, people sought protection of their lives and property. As, a result
of it a society was formed where people undertook to respect each other and live in peace and
harmony. By the second pact of subjectionis, people united together and pledged to obey an
authority and surrendered the whole or part of their freedom and rights to an authority. The
authority guaranteed everyone protection of life, property and to a certain extent liberty.
Thus, they must agree to establish society by collectively and reciprocally renouncing the
rights they had against one another in the State of Nature and they must imbue some one
person or assembly of persons with the authority and power to enforce the initial contract. In
other words, to ensure their escape from the State of Nature, they must both agree to live
together under common laws, and create an enforcement mechanism for the social contract
and the laws that constitute it. Thus, the authority or the government or the sovereign or the
state came into being because of the two agreements.

6
 Analysis of the theory of Social Contract by Thomas Hobbes
 Thomas Hobbes theory of Social Contract appeared for the first time in Leviathan
published in the year 1651 during the Civil War in Britain. Thomas Hobbes’ legal theory
is based on “Social contract”. According to him, prior to Social Contract, man lived in the
State of Nature. Man’s life in the State of Nature was one of fear and selfishness. Man
lived in chaotic condition of constant fear. Life in the State of Nature was ‘solitary’,
‘poor’, ‘nasty’, ‘brutish’, and ‘short’.
 Man has a natural desire for security and order. In order to secure self-protection and self-
preservation, and to avoid misery and pain, man entered into a contract. This idea of self-
preservation and self-protection are inherent in man’s nature and in order to achieve this,
they voluntarily surrendered all their rights and freedoms to some authority by this
contract who must command obedience. As a result of this contract, the mightiest
authority is to protect and preserve their lives and property. This led to the emergence of
the institution of the “ruler” or “monarch”, who shall be the absolute head. Subjects had
no rights against the absolute authority or the sovereign and he is to be obeyed in all
situations however bad or unworthy he might be. However, Hobbes placed moral
obligations on the sovereign who shall be bound by natural law.
 Hence, it can be deduced that, Hobbes was the supporter of absolutism. In the opinion of
Hobbes, “law is dependent upon the sanction of the sovereign and the Government
without sword are but words and of no strength to secure a man at all”. He therefore,
reiterated that civil law is the real law because it is commanded and enforced by the
sovereign. Thus, he upheld the principle of “Might is always Right”.
 Hobbes thus infers from his mechanistic theory of human nature that humans are
necessarily and exclusively self-interested. All men pursue only what they perceive to be
in their own individually considered best interests. They respond mechanistically by
being drawn to that which they desire and repelled by that to which they are averse. In
addition to being exclusively self-interested, Hobbes also argues that human beings are
reasonable. They have in them the rational capacity to pursue their desires as efficiently
and maximally as possible. From these premises of human nature, Hobbes goes on to

7
 construct a provocative and compelling argument for which they ought to be willing to
submit themselves to political authority. He did this by imagining persons in a situation
prior to the establishment of society, the State of Nature.
 Hobbes impels subjects to surrender all their rights and vest all liberties in the sovereign
for preservation of peace, life and prosperity of the subjects. It is in this way the natural
law became a moral guide or directive to the sovereign for preservation of the natural
rights of the subjects. For Hobbes all law is dependent upon the sanction of the sovereign.
All real law is civil law, the law commanded and enforced by the sovereign and are
brought into the world for nothing else but to limit the natural liberty of particular men, in
such a manner, as they might not hurt but to assist one another and join together against a
common enemy. He advocated for an established order. Hence, Individualism,
materialism, utilitarianism and absolutions are inter-woven in the theory of Hobbes.

Analysis of the theory of Social Contract by John Locke

 John Locke theory of Social Contract is different than that of Hobbes. According to him,
man lived in the State of Nature, but his concept of the State of Nature is different as
contemplated by Hobbesian theory. Locke’s view about the state of nature is not as
miserable as that of Hobbes. It was reasonably good and enjoyable, but the property was
not secure. He considered State of Nature as a “Golden Age”. It was a state of “peace,
goodwill, mutual assistance, and preservation”. In that state of nature, men had all the
rights which nature could give them. Locke justifies this by saying that in the State of
Nature, the natural condition of mankind was a state of perfect and complete liberty to
conduct one’s life as one best sees fit. It was free from the interference of others. In that
state of nature, all were equal and independent. This does not mean, however, that it was
a state of license. It was one not free to do anything at all one pleases, or even anything
that one judges to be in one’s interest. The State of Nature, although a state wherein there
was no civil authority or government to punish people for transgressions against laws,
was not a state without morality. The State of Nature was pre-political, but it was not pre
moral. Persons are assumed to be equal to one another in such a state, and therefore
equally capable of discovering and being bound by the Law of Nature. So, the State of
Nature was a ‘state of liberty’, where persons are free to pursue their own interests and

8
 plans, free from interference and, because of the Law of Nature and the restrictions that it
imposes upon persons, it is relatively peaceful.
 Property plays an essential role in Locke’s argument for civil government and the
contract that establishes it. According to Locke, private property is created when a person
mixes his labour with the raw materials of nature. Given the implications of the Law of
Nature, there are limits as to how much property one can own: one is not allowed to take
so more from nature than oneself can use, thereby leaving others without enough for
themselves, because nature is given to all of mankind for its common subsistence. One
cannot take more than his own fair share. Property is the linchpin of Locke’s argument for
the social contract and civil government because it is the protection of their property,
including their property in their own bodies, that men seek when they decide to abandon
the State of Nature.
 John Locke considered property in the State of Nature as insecure because of three
conditions; they are:1. Absence of established law; 2. Absence of impartial Judge; and 3.
Absence of natural power to execute natural laws.
 Thus, man in the State of Nature felt need to protect their property and for the purpose of
protection of their property, men entered into the “Social Contract”. Under the contract,
man did not surrender all their rights to one single individual, but they surrendered only
the right to preserve / maintain order and enforce the law of nature. The individual
retained with them the other rights, i.e., right to life, liberty and estate because these rights
were considered natural and inalienable rights of men.
 Having created a political society and government through their consent, men then gained
three things which they lacked in the State of Nature: laws, judges to adjudicate laws, and
the executive power necessary to enforce these laws. Each man therefore gives over the
power to protect himself and punish transgressors of the Law of Nature to the government
that he has created through the compact.
 According to Locke, the purpose of the Government and law is to uphold and protect the
natural rights of men. So long as the Government fulfils this purpose, the laws given by it
are valid and binding but, when it ceases to fulfil it, then the laws would have no validity
and the Government can be thrown out of power. In Locke’s view, unlimited sovereignty
is contrary to natural law.
 Hence, John Locke advocated the principle of -“a state of liberty; not of license”. Locke
advocated a state for the general good of people. He pleaded for a constitutionally limited
government.

9
 Locke, in fact made life, liberty and property, his three cardinal rights, which greatly
dominated and influenced the Declaration of American Independence, 1776

Analysis of the theory of Social Contract by Jean Jacques

Rousseau
 Jean Jacques Rousseau was a French philosopher who gave a new interpretation to the
theory of Social Contract in his work “The Social Contract” and “ Emile”. According to
him, social contract is not a historical fact but a hypothetical construction of reason. Prior
to the Social Contract, the life in the State of Nature was happy and there was equality
among men. As time passed, however, humanity faced certain changes. As the overall
population increased, the means by which people could satisfy their needs had to change.
People slowly began to live together in small families, and then in small communities.
Divisions of labour were introduced, both within and between families, and discoveries
and inventions made life easier, giving rise to leisure time. Such leisure time inevitably
led people to make comparisons between themselves and others, resulting in public
values, leading to shame and envy, pride and contempt. Most importantly however,
according to Rousseau, was the invention of private property, which constituted the
pivotal moment in humanity’s evolution out of a simple, pure state into one, characterized
by greed, competition, vanity, inequality, and vice. For Rousseau the invention of
property constitutes humanity’s ‘fall from grace’ out of the State of Nature. For this
purpose, they surrendered their rights not to a single individual but to the community as a
whole which Rousseau termed as ‘general will’.
 According to Rousseau, the original ‘freedom, happiness, equality and liberty’ which
existed in primitive societies prior to the social contract was lost in the modern
civilisation. Through Social Contract, a new form of social organisation- the state was
formed to assure and guarantee rights, liberties freedom and equality. The essence of the
Rousseau’s theory of General Will is that State and Law were the product of General Will
of the people. State and the Laws are made by it and if the government and laws do not
conform to ‘general will’, they would be discarded. While the individual parts with his
natural rights, in return he gets civil liberties such as freedom of speech, equality,
assembly, etc.
 The “General Will”, therefore, for all purposes, was the will of majority citizens to which
blind obedience was to be given. The majority was accepted on the belief that majority

10
 view is right than minority view. Each individual is not subject to any other individual but
to the ‘general will’ and to obey this is to obey himself. His sovereignty is infallible,
indivisible, unrepresentable and illimitable.
 Thus, Rousseau favoured people’s sovereignty. His natural law theory is confined to the
freedom and liberty of the individual. For him, State, law, sovereignty, general will, etc.
are interchangeable terms. Rousseau’s theory inspired French and American revolutions
and given impetus to nationalism. He based his theory of social contract on the principle
of “Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains”.

CRITICAL APPREHENTION
1. Rousseau propounded that state, law and the government are interchangeable, but this in
present scenario is different. Even though government can be overthrown but not the state. A
state exists even there is no government.

2. Hobbes concept of absolutism is totally a vague concept in present scenario. Democracy is

the need and examples may be taken from Burma and other nations.

3. According to Hobbes, the sovereign should have absolute authority. This is against the rule
of law because absolute power in one authority brings arbitrariness.

4. Locke concept of State of nature is vague as any conflict with regard to property always
leads to havoc in any society. Hence, there cannot be a society in peace if they have been
conflict with regard to property.

5. Locke concept of laissez-faire is not of welfare oriented. Now in present scenario, every
state undertakes steps to form a welfare state.

11
 Conclusion

Social contract theory focuses on the origination of laws and states, and the influence states
or regulated communities have on the individual. All forms of social contract theory can be
ultimately boiled down to this: The individual desire for security, or safety, demands
fulfillment through a collective agreement. This collective agreement transforms the human
realm from the "natural, primordial state" into an organized society.
 
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. The theories of Locke and Rousseau can thus be seen as - to a degree -  based on
Hobbes disquisitions. However, the latter two have transformed Hobbes' concept to fit into
their respective perspectives on human nature and society.

12
 Webliography

 https://www.quora.com/in/How-do-the-Social-Contract-theories-of-Hobbes-Locke-
and-Rousseau-differ
 http://www.academia.edu/3138759/Social_Contract_Theory_by_Hobbes_Locke_and
_Rousseau
 http://www.indiastudychannel.com/resources/150471-The-Social-Contract-Theory-
According-To-Hobbes-Locke-And-Rousseau.aspx
 https://www.ukessays.com/essays/philosophy/comparative-analysis-of-hobbes-locke-
and-rousseau-philosophy-essay.php


13