Social Contract Theory

March 10, 2019 | Author: YasirAhmad | Category: Social Contract, Philosophical Movements, Social Institutions, Society, Philosophical Theories
Share Embed Donate

Short Description

Social contract theory...


Social Contract theory 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 oc!e and "ousseau. Thomas Hobbes

Thomas Hobbes was of opinion that society came into being as a means for the protection of  men against the consequences of their own nature. #an in the state of nature was in perpetual conflict with his neighbors on account of his essentially selfish nature. $The life of  man was solitary poor, nasty, brutish and short$. %very man was an enemy to every other man. Hobbes in his boo! eviathan has made it clear that man found nothing but grief in the company of his fellows. Since the conditions in the state of nature were intolerable and men longed for peace, the people entered into a !ind of social contract to ensure for themselves security and certainty of life and property. &y mutual agreement they decided to surrender their natural rights into the hands of a few or one with authority to command. The agreement was of each with all and of all with each other. The contract became binding on the whole community as perpetual social bond. Thus in order to protect himself against the evil consequences of his own nature man organi'ed himself in society in order to live in peace with all. John Locke

John oc!e believed that man in the state of nature was en(oying an ideal liberty free from all sorts of rules and regulations. The state of nature was a state of peace, goodwill, mutual assistance and preservation.&ut there was no recogni'ed system of law and (ustice. Hence his peaceful life was often upset by the corruption and viciousness of degenerate men. The men were forced to live in full of fears and continual dangers. )n order to escape from this and to gain certainty and security men made a contract to enter into civil society or the state. This contract oc!e called social contract. This contract put an end to the state of nature and substituted it by civil society. The social contract was no more than a surrender of rights and powers so that man$s remaining rights would be protected and preserved. The contract was for limited and specific purposes and what was given up or surrendered to the whole community and not to a man or to an assembly of 

men. According to oc!e the social contract later on contributed to the governmental control. The governmental contract was made by the society when it established a government and selected a ruler to remove the inconveniences of ill *condition. Jean Jacques Rousseau "ousseau the +rench writer of the -th century in his famous

boo! The Social ontract wrote that man in the state of nature was a noble savage who led a life of primitive simplicity and idyllic happiness. He was independent, contented, self/ sufficient, healthy, fearless and good. )t was only primitive instinct and sympathy which united him with others. He !new neither right or wrong and was free from all notions of  virtue and vice. #an en(oyed a pure, unsophisticated, innocent life of perfect freedom and equality in the state of nature. &ut these conditions did not last long. 0opulation increased and reason was dawned. Simplicity and idyllic happiness disappeared. +amilies were established, institution of property emerged and human equality was ended. #an began to thin! in terms of mine and yours. 1hen equality and happiness of the early state was lost, war, murder, conflicts became the order of the day. The escape from this was found in the formation of a civil society. 2atural freedom gave place to civil freedom by a social contract. As a result of this contract a multitude of individuals became a collective unity/ a civil society ."ousseau said that by virtue of this contract everyone while uniting himself to all remains as free as before.

There was only one contract which was social as well as political. The individual surrendered himself completely and unconditionally to the will of the body of which he became a member. The body so created was a moral and collective body and "ousseau called it the general will. The unique feature of the general will was that it represented collective good as distinguished from the private interests of its members. The theory of social contract has been widely critici'ed as historically there is nothing to show that the society has ever been deliberately created as a result of voluntary agreement or contract. 2or can we suppose that man could ever thin! of entering into a contract with others when he lived under conditions of extreme simplicity, ignorance and even brutality. The theory seemed to be mere fiction as state of nature never existed. The most primitive people even lived in some form of society however rudimentary or unorgani'ed. There are always two parties to the contract. There cannot be a one/sided contract as was conceived by Hobbes. The advocates of the theory hold that the early individuals entered into the

contract for their individual safety and security of property. &ut history tells us the other way. %arly law was more communal than individual and the unit of society was not the individual but the family. Society has moved from status to contract and not from contract to status as the theorists of the social contract argued. According to Sir Henry #aine contract is not the beginning of society but the end of it.

3rganismic Theory of Society #an is a social animal. He lives in social groups in communities and in society. Human life and society almost go together. #an cannot live without society. #an is biologically and psychologically equipped to live in groups, in society. Society has become an essential condition for human life to arise and to continue. The relationship between individual and society is ultimately one of the profound of all the problems of social philosophy. )t is more philosophical rather than sociological because it involves the question of values. #an depends on society. )t is in the society that an individual is surrounded and encompassed by culture, a societal force. )t is in the society again that he has to conform to the norms, occupy statuses and become members of groups. The question of the relationship between the individual and the society is the starting point of many discussions. )t is closely connected with the question of the relationship of man and society. There is two main theories regarding the relationship of man and society .They are the social contract theory and the organismic theory.

Social ontract theory

3rganismic theory of society

)nterrelationship between individual and Society

Complete information on the Organismic Theory of the origin of human society 

Organismic theory is another vital theory of the origin of human society. Plato, Aristotle, Herbert Spencer, Spengler and Novico ere the main e!ponents of this theory. They have compared the society ith a living human body or organism.  According to them, society is nothing but a "ind of living organism, biological organism. #n other ords, the organismic theory video society is a living organism possessing organs,  hich perform functions analogues to these of a plant or animal. Among ail these scholars Herbert Spencer has occupied uni$ue place, because of this significant contribution in the field of organismic theory or society.  According to Spencer, society is not merely a collection of individuals, it is more than that,  %ust as an organism is mere than a mere collection of ceils. Spencer developed the organismic theory by ma"ing an elaborate comparison beteen the society and the organism. He thin"s that society is li"e a biological system a greater organism, a li"e in its structure and functions. &i"e an organism, society is also sub%ect of the same process of gradual groth or development from a simple to comple! 'state. &i"e an organism, society is also e!hibits differentiation in functions and integration in structure'. Thus according to the organismic theory of society, society is an organism hose structure and function resemble those of the human beings and hich also develops according to the same las. Herbert Spencer indicates that society resembles an organism in the folloing important respects. (. Society li"e organism gros or develops gradually. The human organism goes through the las of development, maturation and decline. Similarly society also passes through some tas such as the las of birth, groth and change or decay.'

). *oth society and organism begin germs. +. Society and organism both e!hibit differential structure functions. . . *oth society and organism are composed of units. Society is composed of the individuals and thus, individuals are considered as the units of society. Similarly, organism is also composed of different organs such as eyes, ears, hands, legs, head etc., and these are regarded as the units of an organism. -. #n both society and organism there e!ists close integration or interdependence of parts. ust as the different parts of the organism are mutually interdependence and on the hole, also the individuals in a dependant are mutually interdependent li"e the cells in an organism dependent in the hole. #nspite of these similarities, Spencer also dras number of structural analogies beteen the society and organism. A living organism possesses sustaining system and distributing system and regulative system corresponding respective to system of production of industry and agriculture, the means of transportation and communication and the government, in society  in the industrial and agricultural systems the circulatory system ith the heart arteries and  veins correspond to the communication and transportation system of nation the nervous system to the government and so on. An individual cell of an organism may die ith, little effect on its life, similarly the death of an individual.  According to P.A. Soro"in society passes through the organic process of birth, youth, maturity, old age and death. On the basis of the above resemblances Spencer concluded that society is an organismic and it is a special organism. The individuals are limbs of the society and behave as the cells of the  body hose activity and life are meant for the sa"e of the hole. ust as the limbs separated from the body have no life, similarly individuals separated from the society have no. life. The individuals e!ist in and ithin the society. #n addition to the above points of/similarities, there are hoever, certain points of  dissimilarities also.  According to Spencer society differs from human organism in the folloing important respects. (. #n organic groth, nature plays a dominant and organismic naturally gros. On the other hand, social groth may be chec"ed or stimulated by man himself.

). The units of a society are not fi!ed in their respective positions li"e those of the individual organism. +. #n an organism, consciousness is concentrated in the small part of the aggregate, that is, in the nervous system hile in a society it is diffused throughout hole aggregate.

View more...


Copyright ©2017 KUPDF Inc.