For Both Hobbes and Locke, the Social Contract is an Agreement Between
The social contract theory is one of the most significant theoretical frameworks in political philosophy. It is a concept that suggests that individuals surrender some of their rights to the state in exchange for protection and security. Two prominent philosophers, Hobbes and Locke, developed this theory independently, each with a slightly different interpretation.
Thomas Hobbes` social contract theory
Thomas Hobbes was a 17th-century English philosopher who believed that the social contract was necessary to prevent humans from descending into a state of constant warfare. Hobbes believed that people were naturally self-interested and aggressive and that in such a state, life was “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.” According to Hobbes, the only way to prevent this was to surrender individual rights and freedoms to a sovereign power, which would have the authority to maintain order and stability.
Hobbes` concept of the social contract was a binding agreement between individuals and the state. The agreement was based on the understanding that the state would protect the individual`s life, liberty, and property in exchange for surrendering certain rights and freedoms. In Hobbes` view, this social contract was not only necessary for survival, but it was also the foundation of social and political order.
John Locke`s social contract theory
John Locke, another 17th-century English philosopher, also believed in the concept of the social contract. However, unlike Hobbes, Locke believed that individuals were inherently rational and capable of cooperating with one another without the need for a sovereign power. Locke believed that the purpose of the state was not to have complete control over the individual, but rather to protect the natural rights of the individual, such as life, liberty, and property.
Locke`s concept of the social contract was that individuals formed a government to protect their rights. In this agreement, individuals surrendered some of their powers to the government. However, the government would exist solely to serve the interests of the people. Locke believed that if the government failed to do so, the individual had the right to revolt and overthrow the government.
Conclusion
In conclusion, both Hobbes and Locke believed in the concept of the social contract, but they had slightly different interpretations of it. Hobbes saw the social contract as necessary to prevent constant warfare, while Locke saw it as a way to protect natural rights. Both philosophers believed that individuals had to surrender some of their rights to the state in exchange for protection and security. Their theories have had a profound impact on our understanding of politics and the role of the state in society.