Analysis Of Thomas Hobbes Social Contract Theory

Thomas Hobbes developed what is now known as the Social Contract Theory. This is the theory that to live in a functioning society contracts, or agreements, must be put in place to restrict the freedom of men in order to maintain peace. Although this is a political theory, Hobbes makes claims on human nature that are harsh and seemingly cynical. I will lay out an argument for why his theory seems to lack the incorporation and recognition of natural human emotions. Then, I will explain how Hobbes would counter this argument using examples from his philosophical text, Leviathan. I will be specifically discussing the disregard of emotions such as love and the inherent social nature of humans in relation to Hobbes’ theory. I believe that Hobbes’

He believes that without these contracts, man would be in a constant state of civil war. The contracts ensure that peace can be established between men with security of survival. Hobbes says that, “it is a contract, wherein one recieveth the benefit of life” (133). To put these contracts in effect, “one must give up [their] right of governing [oneself], to this man, or to this assembly of men” (158). Having a sovereign ensures the safety and security of all men through a “coercive power to compel men equally to the performance of their covenants by the terror of some punishment greater than the benefit they expect by the breach of their covenant” (137). That is to say, men need to be in fear of a higher power in order to abide by laws, and this is in the favour of all people. To say that it is inherent within us not to survive as an entire race, but as an individual, seems to disregard the basic fundamentals of existence. The idea that we need others to survive is something that is within every human and is incredibly fundamental to the continuation of a species. The social aspects of human life bring to question our inherent self motivated living that Hobbes argues for. Being apart of a group of humans makes us feel secure and stable whereas being alone is incredibly

The vulnerability felt when alone drives one to form groups of people who will be protection. The reason society has developed monogamy as the most common form of relationship is because there is an inherent desire for someone who will protect and nourish one at all costs. If the only purpose of romantic love is for the purpose of procreation monogamy would not exist. If this were true, human beings would not only accept the idea of having sex with as many partners as possible, but would prefer this over monogamy for it allows for a larger scale growth of our species. The argument that we would put our own safety in jeopardy for the person we love can be argued with Hobbes’ idea that, “[w]hat you do not want done to you, do not do to another” (127). If we would risk our lives for the one we love, we know that they would do the same. This is why the strength of romantic love is strong and vital to human existence. Hobbes writes that, “The desires and other passions of man are in themselves no sin. No more are the actions that proceed from those passions till they know a law that forbids them” (124). There are no laws which forbid romantic love, therefore it cannot be of harm to humans, for “everyone is governed by his own reason” (126), and the reason of human beings is that one must find a mate to