Social Contract Theory
Social Contract TheoryIs morality a matter of following a social
contract? What should this contract be like?ReviewWhile looking at
egoism last week, we saw that it has three major problems: Clash
with moral intuitionsPublicity: by its own lights, it shouldnt be
taughtPrisoners dilemma: if everyone is an egoist, it can be worse
for all than if everyone was an altruistIn 1650, Hobbes proposes to
solve all these problems through a strictly enforced social
contractMoreover, he argues that we should agree to this social
contract because it is in our self-interest to do soThe State of
NatureHobbes was a psychological egoist and believed that our
natural state is a state of war, due to our natural equality and
Competition for limited resourcesFear of others stealing from you
or killing youGlory, i.e. wanting others to respect youIn this
constant warlike attitude, we wouldnt be able to trust others, and
progress, art, industry, education would all be impossibleAs Hobbes
puts it, the life of man [would be] solitary, poor, nasty, brutish,
and shortWhat is an example of a state of nature?
Getting Out of the State of NatureHow do we get out of the
terrible state of nature? Follow the laws of nature Put a coercive
power in charge to enforce lawsThe laws of nature stem from the
basic right of nature: Each person may do whatever is in their
power to protect their life and the means of preserving itThis
leads to a basic law of nature: One is forbidden from doing what is
destructive to ones life or to the means of preserving itAll the
individual laws of nature, then, are ways of keeping you from
destroying your own lifeThe Laws of Nature and Coercive ForceThere
are many laws of nature, but we will focus on three of the most
important:Seek peace as far as you have hope of obtaining it; if
you cannot obtain it, then resort to warBe willing, when others are
too, to lay down your rights, if you expect others to do the
sameE.g., if you dont want others to mock you, you shouldnt mock
themPerform on the covenants (contracts) you makeHobbes considers
this the font and origin of justiceHobbes thinks its foolish to
perform on a contract without assurance that others will also, so
we need a coercive force to ensure this
Pros and ConsPros of Hobbesian social contract theory:If
followed, it leads to a harmonious societyThere is a lot of
flexibility and freedom, compared to divine command theory,
e.g.Cons:Hobbes thought it was never right to rebel against ones
leader, even if they are oppressive the risks of anarchy (the state
of nature) are too highThis contradicts our moral intuitionsHobbes
reply to egoism is weak: he claims (in his reply to the Fool) that
its never in your self-interest to break the law, because the risk
is too greatThis doesnt seem empirically supportedQuick Aside:
Lockes Social ContractIn 1689, philosopher John Locke offered a
slightly different description of our natural state, focusing on
its freedom and equalityNonetheless, he agrees with Hobbes that we
could never feel secure in this state and hence would give up some
freedom for greater securityHe differs from Hobbes in considering
it appropriate for people to overthrow their government when the
trade-off isnt worth itUnsurprisingly, the colonists drew on Locke
in drafting the Declaration of IndependenceWhich view do you think
is closer to the truth?Rawls: Justice as FairnessFor Hobbes,
justice is simply following through on your covenant: to do so is
just, to break a covenant is unjustRawls (1985) argues that justice
is somewhat more complicated: it means being fair to all members of
the societyTo ensure fairness in our social contract, he proposes
that we imagine a hypothetical scenario he calls the original
positionIn the original position, we have a veil of ignorance: we
dont know what our actual characteristics areE.g., you would not
know your gender, race, etc.The Principles of JusticeWithout
knowing what characteristics each of us has personally, Rawls
thinks, we could agree on principles of justice that were fair to
allIn particular, you would want to maximize opportunity for the
least advantaged, since that could be youThus, he thinks we would
settle on the following:Equality in basic rights and dutiesSocial
and economic inequalities are only just if they result in
compensating benefits for everyone, in particular for the least
advantaged of society
Summing UpFor Hobbes, the goal of the social contract is to
avoid a state of nature; to do so, we should follow the laws of
nature and obey those in chargeFor Rawls, the goal of the social
contract is to make society just, i.e. fair for all; to do so, we
should choose principles that arent biased by our knowledge of our
personal characteristics
Next week, well consider the view of Rawls primary opponent: the
utilitarianFor utilitarians, all that matters is the total amount
of happiness, not whether its justly distributed
