Social Contract Theory: Hobbes, Rousseau, Weber, and Rawls
Hobbes’s Social Contract and State of Nature
Thomas Hobbes’s State of Nature is a philosophical concept that describes life without social organization or government. In this state, individuals live according to their own will, believing they have the right to everything. This leads to a constant state of war, as individuals try to force their will upon others.
To escape this state of war, individuals agree to concede a portion of their freedom to a Leviathan, or government. This Social Contract creates a body that works for the protection of life, property, and social organization.
Rousseau’s Views on the State of Nature and Social Contract
Jean-Jacques Rousseau’s definition of the State of Nature differs from Hobbes’s. Rousseau believed that men in their natural condition would be in a state of peace and equality. However, as men began to claim ownership of material goods, problems arose.
Rousseau’s Social Contract focuses on collectivism rather than individual rights. He argued that individual will must give in to the”general will” or the law. For Rousseau, the Social Contract existed so men could fully enjoy their freedom.
Weber’s 3 Types of Legitimacy
Max Weber proposed three types of legitimacy: Traditional, Charismatic, and Legal-Rational.
- Traditional legitimacy is based on custom and tradition, such as a monarchy or tribalism.
- Charismatic legitimacy is based on the personal qualities of a leader, such as a charismatic dictator.
- Legal-Rational legitimacy is based on a government elected to make prevail the will of the people, such as a modern democracy.
John Rawls’s Civil Disobedience
John Rawls characterized Civil Disobedience as an act of breach of law perpetrated by the people to warn the government against a particular law or regulation. It is not an act of anarchy, as the people engaged in civil disobedience are willing to accept any punishment it may bring about.
According to Rawls, acts of civil disobedience are morally just if they meet the following criteria:
- Consciousness – must be morally consistent.
- Publicity – must be performed in the most public manner possible.
- Communication – must draw public attention to the particular issue that must be reassessed.
- Non-violence – works in asserting respect for the current law; dissidents must be willing to accept any legal punishment resulting from their actions.