Where mostly the social contract theory is mildly differentiated
between different philosophers I prefer John Locke’s version of it. One reason
is that Locke’s conception of state of nature is more optimistic towards individuals
than that of Hobbs. However, Locke maintains that one’s life, liberty, property
is at stake because the state of nature lacks civil authority and one must
abandon that state by contracting together to form civil government. Also, I feel
that it’s more practical than Hobbs’s theory because it puts a check on the sovereign
by giving the citizens the right to rebel as opposed to the absolute power of
the sovereign in Hobbs’s theory. In addition Locke also suggests separation of
power instead of a sovereign having infinite amount of authority.
As compared to Roseau’s theory also, Locke’s
theory comes out as more practical. This is because Roseau suggests that the
entire community should come together to form the general will and a democratic
government would not be possible without us thereby suggesting a radical kind
of democracy, which is impractical in my opinion.
1 comment:
Locke is indeed more optimistic about man. I think looking at the perspective of all of these thinkers provides us with a better understanding of the social contract.
Post a Comment