Analysis Of John Hobbes And Cons Of Social Contract

789 Words4 Pages
He believed that the situation was not entirely bleak because we are intelligent beings who can overcome the State of nature by forming states and creating civil society. Hobbes believed that if each individual shares the same views about acquiring peace and mutual co-operation then they can construct a social contract that will grant them immunity from the State of Nature. A social contract can be broken apart into two phases: the first is that people must mutually agree to establishing a society collectively by acknowledging each other’s right to live equally and the second phase is that they must agree to submit to the authority of an individual or group who will in turn make sure that the first phase of the social contract will be carried out. This is done so that those people who choose to engage in a social contract with one another can have surety that even if their counterparts fail to reciprocate the social contract terms then the authority in charge will enforce certain laws that will punish and deter people from going against the social contract. Since a state will be granted the authority to enforce punishments for those who breach the social contract then people will begin adjusting their lifestyles to in accordance with the social contract unlike in the State of Nature wereby there was no officially authority to rule and enforce order so that people can co-operate despite their differences. This is a good way for people to live amongst each other harmoniously

More about Analysis Of John Hobbes And Cons Of Social Contract

Open Document