Seminar Course 1

A Review of Social contract theory, comparative analysis of the political

Philosophies of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau

Name : Atiya Akbani

College/Institution : Late Govindrao Wanjari College of Law, Nagpur

Class : B.A.LL.B. (First Sem)

Subject : Political Science

INTRODUCTION
Social contract theory seeks to explain the legitimacy of political authority and
the formation of governments. The concept suggests that individuals consent,
either explicitly or tacitly, to surrender some of their natural freedoms in
exchange for security, protection, and the benefits of organized society. The
social contract serves as the foundation for understanding the relationship
between individuals and the state. This paper offers a review of the
contributions of three pivotal philosophers in this tradition: Thomas Hobbes,
John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Each of these thinkers presents a
different interpretation of the social contract, reflecting their views on human
nature, the role of the state, and the rights of individuals.

THE STATE OF NATURE AND HUMAN NATURE

The state of nature is a hypothetical or real condition of humans before they
organized into societies or civilisations. It's a concept that's been used in
political theory, ethics, social contract theory, religion, and international law.The
state of nature is often associated with the absence of a governing body.
Philosophers have had different views on the state of nature, but many believe
that it was eventually replaced by a formal society because of the need for rules
to help people live peacefully.
● Some key ideas about the state of nature include:

1. Thomas Hobbes: The State of War

Hobbes, in his seminal work Leviathan (1651), presents a pessimistic view of
human nature and the state of nature. For Hobbes, the state of nature is a
pre-political condition characterized by the absence of law and authority. In this
condition, individuals are driven by basic instincts such as self-preservation and
the desire for power. Hobbes famously asserts that life in the state of nature
would be "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short." Without a higher authority to
enforce rules, people would be in constant conflict, resulting in a "war of all
against all.”To escape this chaos, individuals enter into a social contract in
which they agree to surrender all of their rights to a sovereign authority. This
sovereign, according to Hobbes, should have absolute power to maintain peace
and order. For Hobbes, the primary function of the social contract is to establish
security and prevent the violence that arises from human nature.

1
John Locke: The State of Equality
Locke, on the other hand, offers a much more optimistic view of human nature
in his Two Treatises of Government (1689). For Locke, the state of nature is not
one of constant war, but a condition of relative peace and equality. In this state,
individuals are governed by natural law, which is rooted in reason and
prescribes that no one should harm another in their life, liberty, or property.
Unlike Hobbes, Locke believes that individuals in the state of nature can coexist
peacefully without a sovereign, but their rights are insecure, and disputes may
arise over property. For Locke, the social contract is formed to protect
individuals' natural rights to life, liberty, and property. However, unlike Hobbes'
absolute sovereignty, Locke argues for a government with limited power, one
that operates with the consent of the governed and is accountable to the people.
Locke’s social contract theory emphasizes the importance of private property
and the rule of law as means to safeguard individual freedoms.

Jean-Jacques Rousseau: The Noble Savage

Rousseau, in his work The Social Contract (1762), provides a stark contrast to
both Hobbes and Locke. Rousseau’s view of the state of nature is rooted in the
idea of the "noble savage"—humans in their primitive state are not driven by
greed or the lust for power, but instead are peaceful, free, and virtuous.
Rousseau suggests that the development of private property and the rise of
social inequality led to the corruption of human nature. Thus, for Rousseau, the
problem with society is not the state of nature itself but the way civilization has
distorted natural human qualities.In Rousseau's social contract, the goal is to
create a society where individuals collectively agree to form a "general will"
that reflects the common good. The social contract, for Rousseau, is not about
submitting to an absolute sovereign, but about creating a direct democracy
where citizens participate actively in the formation of laws. Rousseau’s notion
of the general will is central to his vision of a free society, where true freedom is
found not in the absence of constraints but in the alignment of personal desires
with the collective will.

THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT AND SOVEREIGNTY

Sovereignty is the authority of a government to govern a nation, and it's a key
feature of a state.Sovereignty is the right to govern a territory without outside
interference.
2
It's the belief that a government has the right to control its own people, military,
finances, and territory.
● Some key ideas according to the role of government and sovereignty
include:

1. Hobbes: Absolute Sovereignty

For Hobbes, the role of government is to ensure peace and security. The social
contract involves individuals giving up all their rights in exchange for
the protection offered by a powerful sovereign. The sovereign’s authority is
absolute and unquestionable, as any limit to its power would undermine the very
security it is meant to provide. Hobbes contends that only an absolute monarch
can ensure the stability necessary for a civil society. In this framework, political
authority derives from the need for self-preservation, and rebellion against the
sovereign is seen as an existential threat to social order.

2. Locke: Limited Government and the Separation of Powers

In contrast to Hobbes, Locke advocates for a limited government that exists to
protect the natural rights of individuals. For Locke, the social contract is an
agreement among individuals to form a government that is accountable to the
people. This government is legitimate only if it operates with the consent of the
governed and respects individual rights. Locke's theory emphasizes the
importance of the separation of powers to prevent any one branch of
government from becoming tyrannical. Legislative power, in particular, is
paramount, as it represents the will of the people. Locke also holds that if the
government violates the rights of individuals, citizens have the right to revolt
and establish a new government.

3. Rousseau: The General Will and Direct Democracy

Rousseau's concept of sovereignty differs significantly from that of Hobbes and
Locke. He argues that sovereignty belongs to the people, not to an individual
ruler or a government. In Rousseau’s view, the social contract is a means of
creating a collective will, or "general will," which transcends individual
interests. The general will represents the common good, and individuals must
subordinate their personal desires to it in order to achieve true freedom.
Rousseau rejects representative democracy, arguing instead for direct
democracy where all citizens participate in the formulation of laws.
3
His ideal government is one in which the citizens actively engage in
decision-making, ensuring that laws reflect the collective will and promote
equality.

THE RIGHTS OF INDIVIDUALS

Individual rights include a variety of rights that are inherent to all people, such
as the right to life, freedom of speech, and the right to education.These rights
include the right to life, freedom from torture, freedom of speech, freedom of
religion, and the right to education. Human rights are inherent to all people,
regardless of race, sex, nationality, ethnicity, language, religion, or any other
status.
● Here are some views regarding the rights of the Individuals:

1. HOBBES: THE SURRENDER OF RIGHTS

In Hobbesian theory, the social contract requires individuals to surrender all
natural rights to the sovereign in exchange for peace and security. This
surrender is absolute; there are no individual rights that the sovereign cannot
override. Hobbes’ emphasis on security means that the individual's personal
freedoms are subordinated to the needs of the state. However, this sacrifice is
seen as necessary to prevent the return to the state of nature, where life is
fraught with danger.

2. LOCKE: NATURAL RIGHTS AND THE RIGHT TO

REVOLUTION
Locke places great importance on the protection of natural rights—life, liberty,
and property. These rights are inalienable and cannot be surrendered or
transferred. Locke’s government is based on the idea that individuals consent to
the formation of a government in order to protect these rights. If the government
violates these rights, Locke argues that individuals have the right to revolt and
establish a new government. Locke’s theory strongly emphasizes individual
liberty, the rule of law, and the protection of property as essential elements of
political legitimacy.

3. ROUSSEAU: THE FREEDOM OF THE GENERAL WILL

Rousseau’s conception of freedom is distinct from that of Hobbes and Locke.
For Rousseau, freedom is not about the absence of constraints, but rather about
aligning individual wills with the collective will of the community.
 4
The social contract, in Rousseau's view, ensures that citizens act in accordance
with the general will, which represents the common good. While individuals
must sacrifice some of their personal desires, they gain true freedom by
participating in the collective decision-making process and contributing to the
common good.

CONCLUSION
The social contract theories of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau provide
contrasting views on human nature, the role of government, and the rights of
individuals. Hobbes presents a vision of absolute sovereignty necessary to
maintain order in a chaotic world, while Locke advocates for a government with
limited powers that protects individual rights. Rousseau, in contrast, emphasizes
the importance of collective will and direct democracy, with freedom defined as
participation in the formation of the general will. Despite their differences, all
three thinkers have had a profound influence on the development of political
philosophy, shaping modern concepts of governance, liberty, and the rule of law.

REFERENCES
1. Hobbes, T. (1651). Leviathan. Andrew Crooke.
2. Locke, J. (1689). Two Treatises of Government. Awnsham Churchill.
3. Rousseau, J.-J. (1762). The Social Contract. Marc-Michel Rey.
4. Ryan, A. (1993). John Locke: Political Thinker. Polity Press.
5. Tuck, R. (1996). Hobbes: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford University
Press.
6. Gourevitch, V. (2014).
7. Rousseau’s The Social Contract: A Reader’s Guide. Continuum.
5