Hume Theory Versus Social Contract Theory

Hume Versus Social Contract Theory Hume states that “some other foundation of government” than the consent of the governed “must also be admitted.” In this essay, I will first outline Hume’s arguments against the social contract theory, then I will evaluate it by stating the reasons why people agree with Hume, and finally how I still believe Hume’s argument is not persuasive. The social contract theory states that the legitimacy of the government depends on our consent (Friend, 2015). Hume argues that we, as individuals, didn’t choose where we are born. Therefore, it’s unreasonable to think that one gives tacit consent to the government just because they were born there (Hume 23). Also, Hume says that peasants don’t have the capability to …show more content…
People who agree with Hume would say that in order for consent to have influence, the citizens must have voluntarily consented to the authority of the government (Hume, 8) because the citizens do not have a moral obligation to keep the promise of obedience to the government if they were forced to consent. Therefore, consent can’t be inferred if the consent was not voluntary. For example, Hume says that an individual does not get to choose where they are born (Hume 23), therefore, their consent is not voluntary and their duty to the government should not be inferred. Hume also states that consent from a peasant that wants to leave the country, but cannot due to not having the necessary resources and money to leave (Hume, 24), cannot be implied because they are forced to remain in the country and them staying is not voluntary …show more content…
If you go against the laws of the country consequences will occur. For example, if you go against the Criminal Code of Canada and you commit a robbery and steal items that value more than five thousand dollars, a consequence that you face is up to ten years of imprisonment (Criminal Code, Section 322, 334 (a)). Therefore, by not consenting to the laws of the government, consequences can happen.
However, one who agrees with Hume may say “what if someone just doesn’t want to go to jail, therefore they don’t steal, is this still consenting to the government?” I would still say that this situation still shows consent to the government because the overall outcome is still following the laws of the country, therefore consequences do not occur. Overall, this means that it doesn’t matter that one can’t choose where they are born and if they can or cannot leave the country because even if they move to or visit another country, they still are tacitly consenting to the laws of the