ipl-logo

Rhetorical Function Of Social Contract And Popular Sovereignty

637 Words3 Pages

LAWS 2501 Essay

What are the rhetorical functions of social contract and popular sovereignty?

The rhetorical functions of social contract and popular sovereignty are for the protection of property and social order through the general will. Consent constructs social contract and popular sovereignty and with the consent comes the protection of ones life, liberty, and property. Thus, establishing social order. In the beginning, people existed in the world as individuals. However, as men started interacting with each other it was needed for a set of guides for their own protection, which created the idea of the general will. General will in this case is the mutual agreement to give up their rights in the state of nature in order for the protection of their life, liberty, and property. In conclusion, the function of the social contract and popular sovereignty is for the self-preservation of men.

To Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau, social contract is different in three aspects; the nature of men, …show more content…

(cite here) Thus, in life of state of nature is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short. (cite here) Locke and Rousseau believed that in the state of nature, men are reasonably good. State of nature is a state of peace, goodwill, mutual assistance, and preservation. (19) That all are equal and independent, no one harming another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions. (6) The view of men and the starting point for Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau are respectfully different.

Similarly, difference can also be seen in their reason for the state or a natural judge. Hobbes states that without the subjection to a common power, men are in a state of war due to their selfish human nature. However, for Locke and Rousseau, the state exists for the preservation and protection of the natural rights of its

Show More
Related
511 Words | 3 Pages

The Compact created the idea of a social contract . A social contract is authorized to follow the compact's rules and regulations for the sake of order and survival. “Civil Body Politic” purpose was to set equal law for the pilgrims and the stranger on the Mayflower ship.

Read More
1208 Words | 5 Pages

Hobbes and Locke had opposing views and interpretations of men and their state of nature. Hobbes was around during the time that an absolute monarchy was the acceptable type of government for society. This was most acceptable to Hobbes because he believed that if society would leave man in his own state of nature he would be brutish. Also he believed that a government with

Read More
595 Words | 3 Pages

The social contract in John Locke’s declaration is the State of Nature. The natural condition of mankind is a state of perfect and complete liberty to conduct one’s life as one best sees fit. Locke’s social contract is best described as freedom from the interference of others in one’s life. The State of Nature is pre-political, but it is not pre-moral by today’s standards. Another social contract from Locke is the Law of Nature.

Read More
1184 Words | 5 Pages

The social contract is a theoretical concept that describes the relationship between individuals and the state. In this relationship, individuals agree to give up some of their freedoms in exchange for protection

Read More
1012 Words | 5 Pages

However, by doing so, we retain our individuality and freedom. In chapter 6, of the social contract Rousseau argues that people need to give up their individual freedom and unite for the common good of all in order to overcome the natural threats to their own existence. It is their own existence that motivates them to give up their individual freedom and unite. The problem with the social contract lies in the opposing forces of individual freedom versus the sovereign that was formed when they united.

Read More
2000 Words | 8 Pages

In contrast to Hobbes, who argues social bonds form to regulate human nature, Rousseau argues that the formation of the civil state results from and in a “change in man,” that humans must of necessity be denatured in the process of forming society. There are similarities between the two’s philosophies, but it is Rousseau, through his arguments that human nature can be changed, who articulates a political vision more consistent with the claim that humans are asocial by nature. In the beginning, the arguments of both Hobbes and Rousseau are similar. Man in nature is isolated.

Read More
1441 Words | 6 Pages

When comparing the two different accounts of English philosophers Thomas Hobbes and John Locke we must take into consideration a number of things such as the age in which they lived and the time in which they produced their philosophical writings. We will however find out that these two philosophers actually have a couple of things in which agree on even though most of their opinions clash. On one side we have Thomas Hobbes who lived in the time of the English Civil War (1642-1651) who provides a negative framework for his philosophical opinions in his masterpiece Leviathan and who advocates for philosophical absolutism . On the other side we have John Locke, living during the glorious revolution (1688-1689) he presents a positive attitude in his book The Second Treatise of Government and advocates for philosophical and biblical constitutionalism. It is important that we know that the state of nature describes a pre- political society prior to the social contract.

Read More
1437 Words | 6 Pages

State of Nature is the condition under which men lived prior to the formation of societies which may be considered as an historical fact or a hypothetical claim" (Steele, 1993). That is, the condition that men lived before the formation of legitimate government. Social contract on the other hand, is the hypothesis that one's moral obligations are dependent upon an implicit agreement between individuals to form a society (Celeste, 2004). Both Hobbes and Locke used social contract as a means of explaining their Ideas on the origin

Read More
1212 Words | 5 Pages

Hobbes developed the ‘social contract theory’, which is the idea that civilians give up some of their freedom and liberty for protection from the leader. This concept, which was used during Hobbes’s time, is still a part of the government today. Hobbes brings down this concept in his world famous book, Leviathan. A picture of a ‘giant’ monarch holding onto a tiny world is used to describe his version of the social contract. The drawing depicts the trade of freedom for safety.

Read More
1009 Words | 5 Pages

After these contracts are established, however, then society becomes possible, and people can be expected to keep their promises, cooperate with one another, and so on. I believe that thanks to the social contract we created justice and established what is moral and immoral for the whole society and not only on what we think could be moral or immoral. This topic may be controversial for some people because they will probably think that even though the social contract was created to be equal for all people there are some things until today that does not apply for all. But for me that is not a strong reason to do not believe in the Social contract I strongly believe in this theory because this is what makes a civil society with justice and morality. A philosopher Stuart Rachels suggests that, “ morality is the set of rules governing behavior that rational people accept, on the condition that others accept them too”.

Read More
1751 Words | 8 Pages

The State of Nature, although a state wherein there is no civil authority or government to punish people for transgressions against laws, is not a state without morality. To Locke, 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. The Law of Nature, which is on Locke’s view the basis of all morality, and given to us by God, commands that we not harm others with regards to their life, health, liberty, or possessions. This is because we all belong equally to God, and because we cannot take away that which is rightfully His, we are prohibited from harming one another. So, the State of Nature is a state of liberty where persons are free to pursue their own interests and plans, free from interference, and, because of the Law of Nature and the restrictions that it imposes upon persons, it is relatively peaceful.

Read More
1005 Words | 5 Pages

Within each of these relationships is a social contract that explains and regulates the types of interactions that will occur. Social contract theory is the idea that a person’s moral or political obligations depend on a mutual agreement or contract constructed by each party involved. Between individuals there may constantly be an underlying sense of competition which is why it is important to understand the rights that an individual may possess within a society in order to act appropriately. Between an individual and the governing body, there may be a sense of protection. If the terms of the contract between people are somehow broken or not obeyed, then they may decide to withdraw from the contract allowing for the opportunity to create a new social contract or avoid getting involved in another one.

Read More
1351 Words | 6 Pages

Thus, both men would evaluate the statement that “in a legitimate state all men are free and there is no inequality,” differently. Rousseau would mostly disagree, holding that the state itself is the impetus for inequality. Hobbes would largely agree, contending that men are equal both in a primitive state of conflict and under a sovereign’s awesome power. These different responses result from the philosophers’ opposing views on fundamental human nature, civil society’s raison d’etre, and government’s inevitable form. --- Rousseau begins his

Read More
1740 Words | 7 Pages

Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau have become known as three of the most prominent political theorists in the world today. Their philosophies and innovative thinking is known worldwide and it has influenced the creation of numerous new governments. All three thinkers agree on the idea of a social contract but their opinions differ on how the social contract is established and implemented within each society. These philosophers state, that in order for the social contract to be successful people need to give up certain freedoms in order to secure fundamental protections from the state, henceforth the state then has certain responsibilities to their citizens. Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau all believe that before men were governed we all lived in a state of nature.

Read More
1084 Words | 5 Pages

Thomas Hobbes proposed that the ideal government should be an absolute monarchy as a direct result of experiencing the English Civil War, in which there was internal conflict between the parliamentarians and the royalists. Hobbes made this claim under the assumption that an absolute monarchy would produce consistent policies, reduce conflicts and lower the risk of civil wars due to the singular nature of this ruling system. On another hand, John Locke counters this proposal with the view that absolute monarchies are not legitimate as they are inconsistent with the state of nature. These two diametrically opposed views stem from Hobbes’ and Locke’s different understandings of human nature, namely with regard to power relationships, punishment, and equality in the state of nature. Hobbes’ belief that human beings are selfish and appetitive is antithetical with Locke’s contention that human beings are intrinsically moral even in the state of nature, which results in Locke’s strong disagreement with Hobbes’ proposed absolute monarchy.

Read More

More about Rhetorical Function Of Social Contract And Popular Sovereignty

Related Topics

Open Document