• Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
Reading...
Front

Card Range To Study

through

image

Play button

image

Play button

image

Progress

1/16

Click to flip

Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;

Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;

H to show hint;

A reads text to speech;

16 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back

Social contract theory

In a nutshell, this theory states that, to preserve our individual lives, we mutually agree to set aside our hostilities and live in peace under governmental protection.

Main contract theorists

Rousseau


Locke


Hobbes

Hobbes

Government is good as before life was short and brutish . Believed in absolute power .

Locke

Before was good but we had to create a society. But since we created it they have to act in our favour. If not we have the right to revolution.

Rousseau

The Nobel savage. We have created an illegality community and we have to go back through a proper education.

Anarchism

Government is bad. As it creates an unequal society. As humans are naturally good a government free society would be better off.

"Nasty, Brutish, Short. "

Hobbes describing the original state of man.

J. Diamond

Society has created


More in equality (sexualy and society.)


Decreased the life span.

Plato

The philosophy kings. Plebs could be swayed to easily ( by charisma and good looks) so an elite had to be designated to rule over.

Mills harm principal

Government cannot interfere with your actions UNLESS the purpose or effect is to harm people at which point it is their duty to act.

Why the social contract theory?

In this view, preserving peace is the only justification for political rule,

Hobbed theory

Hobbes asks us to imagine life in primitive times before the creation of any governments. We would all be on our own to find food and other necessities, without the protection of law or the police. Two main factors make this a dangerous task. Selfishness and putting our self first.

According to hobbes what would happen?


you and I are hunting for food and come upon a single apple at the same time.

If I was naturally generous, I’d be willing to let you have it, or at least agree to split it. Since we’re selfish, though, we’ll both want the whole thing for ourselves and will be prepared to fight for it.

Hobbes has a plan which he maps out in three fundamental laws.

First, we should seek peace as a means of self-preservation. (That is, as rational creatures, we should recognize that the best way of surviving is to live in peace) If we can’t achieve peace, then as a backup plan we can destroy whoever we need to in order to survive,


The second law is that we should mutually divest ourselves of hostile rights. In the state of nature, there are no moral restraints whatsoever, and I have complete rights to everything, including my neighbor’s property and even my neighbor’s life. At the same time, though, my neighbor has rights to my property and my life. The key to peace is for me to voluntarily give up my hostile rights towards my neighbor under the condition that he gives up his hostile rights towards me. Thus, I agree not to steal from him under the condition that he agrees to not steal from me. As selfish people, we will be stingy about the rights that we give up, and will only relinquish those that are essential for the peace process. Clearly, giving up hostile

Hobbes 1st

(That is, as rational creatures, we should recognize that the best way of surviving is to live in peace) If we can’t achieve peace, then as a backup plan we can destroy whoever we need to in order to survive,

Hobbes

Hobbes argues that it must have absolute authority over citizens in order to keep peace effectively. Any perceived weakness of governmental power will invite contract breakers, which will undermine the peace.