ALIGARH

MUSLIM UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF LAW
SESSION 2021-2022

SUBJECT – POLITICAL SCIENCE

END TERM ASSIGNMENT

TOPIC- AN ANALYTICAL STUDY

ON THE SOCIAL CONTRACT

THEORY OF THE STATE

SUBMITTED TO;
Dr. S SEM ALI
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR
FACULTY OF LAW

SUBMITTED BY;
FIDA FATHIMA S
BA LLB (HONS)-1st SEM
SEC; A ROLL NO:21BALLB-34

ENROLLMENT NO.GM9001

DATE OF SUBMISSION; 12/04/2022

 1

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I am overwhelmed in all humbleness and gratefulness to acknowledge all those who

have helped me to put these theorys well above the level of simplicity and into
something concrete. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my Professor
Dr. S SEM ALI who gave me this wonderful opportunity to do this splendid
assignment on the topic- “AN ANALYTICAL STUDY ON THE SOCIAL CONTRACT
THEORY OF THE STATE” which helped me in doing a lot of research through which
I came to know about various new facts. I shouldn’t have successfully completed this
assignment without his guidance, dedication, sincerity, and motivation. Besides, Sir
had left no stones unturned in arranging the classes and giving out the lectures.
Moreover, any attempt at any level can't be satisfactorily completed without the
support and help of my friends and family.

Thank you to everyone who helped me in completing this assignment on time.

 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

AN ANALYTICAL STUDY

ON THE SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.2 ORIGIN OF THE STATE
1.3 MEANING OF SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY
1.4 NEED OF SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY
1.5 FAMOUS THINKERS AND SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY
1. THE STATE OF NATURE
2. LAW OF NATURE
3. NATURAL RIGHT
4. SOCIAL CONTRACT
5. SOVERIGNTY
6. LIBERTY
1.6 COMPARISION BETWEEN HOBBES, LOCKE AND ROUSSEAU
1.7 EVALUATION OF SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY
1.8 RELEVANCE OF SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY IN CONTEMPERORY ERA
1.TRUST
2. INCLUSION, PROTECTION AND PARTICIPATION
3. MEASURING AND VALUING WHAT MATTERS TO PEOPLE AND THE PLANET
1.9 CRITICISMS ON SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY
a. FEMINISTIC ARGUMENTS
b. RACE CONSCIOUS ARGUEMENTS
1.10 CONCLUSION
1.11 BIBLIOGRAPHY
 3

1.1 INTRODUCTION
This assignment attempts to have an Analytical study on The Social Contract Theory. Now we will be
discussing each topic concerned with Social Contract Theory in detail i.e, Origin of the State, Famous
thinkers and their opinions on Social Contract Theory, Comparison of their views, its Evaluation and
Criticisms. The Social Contract Theory is not only the most ancient but also the most famous of the
theories regarding the origin of the state. Social Contract Theory increases the opportunity of the want
for social order and positive inherent constraints which may offer us a foundation for morality. While
it would appear that there are sturdy incentives for social anarchy without an exterior objective The
social contract theory can be loosely defined as a hypothetical or actual agreement between society
and its state. This agreement has been held accountable for the foundations of our moral decisions and
stances. In other words, we simply follow the government's rules and regulations in the hope that others
will follow suit, resulting in a more secure and comfortable life. This theory draws on the work of
several philosophers, including Hobbes, Locke, Hume, and Rousseau, to investigate whether our moral
obligations can be explained by a social contract. Each Philosopher has a different take on this
argument; Hobbes, for example, gives a vivid and bleak account of what life would be like if there
were no God. The need obviously exists for us to shape a form of contract to deal with every different
with primary admire and observe Moral judgements. So now let’s look into each concept in detail.

1.2 ORIGIN OF THE STATE

Political thinkers have tried to provide an explanation for the origin of the state in numerous ways.
When, wherein and the way the state got here into life have now no longer been recorded everywhere
in records. Therefore, the political thinkers had been pressured to undertake numerous hypothesis, lots
of which can be now discredited in the mild of contemporary-day knowledge. Among the numerous
theories which can be worried with the origin place of the state the subsequent are defined on this
challenge.
1. The Theory of Divine Origin.
2. Social Contract Theory.
3. Matriarchal and Patriarchal Theory.
4. Force Theory.
5. Evolutionary Theory.

1.3 MEANING OF SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

To begin, social contract theory attempts to explain two things:
1. The Origins of Sovereign Power
2. The moral foundations of the principles that establish the legitimacy of sovereign authority
Social contract theory is concerned with the formation of the social contract and provides answers to
questions such as the nature of life prior to the establishment of the state and the reasons or
circumstances that led to the formation of the social contract, among other things.
 4

The' state of nature' refers to life before the formation of organised societies or governments. Different
political thinkers describe the condition of man and his life in nature in different ways. Some people
describe life in nature as blissful, while others describe it as brutal.

1.4 NEED OF SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

The 4 essential elements which collectively conspire to place us at odds with each other and shape a
form of Social Contract Theory to mitigate those elements.
1. EQUALITY OF NEED: We all have positive primary wishes in common consisting of food,
clothing, and refuge.
2. SCARCITY: Factor one wouldn’t simply be a trouble in any respect besides for issue that is
scarcity. Economists recognise this all too properly and frequently outline economics because the
observe of the scarce allocation of assets that have opportunity uses.
3. EQUALITY OF HUMAN POWER: This is the issue that simply creates a severe trouble whilst
blended with the other factors. For a time, some can possibly take manage and take what they need on
the cost of anybody else. But, in the lengthy run, this power cannot be sustained due to the fact one
individual’s weak point is some other individual’s strength. One individual may also have pressure on
their side, however possibly others have some other advantage. In the cease those variations generally
tend to even out which creates a state of affairs wherein anybody is, in Hobbes’ phrasing, at conflict
towards anybody else for the equal scarce assets.
4. LIMITED ALTRUISM: One technique to the trouble is to rely upon the kindness of strangers (to
paraphrase the well-known play). But, this won’t paintings both because all of us have limits to how
altruistic we're. Let’s face it we aren't infinitely compassionate toward our fellow human beings. 1

1.5 FAMOUS THINKERS AND SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

1. THE STATE OF NATURE:

HOBBES: Man egoistically moved by fear, power, glory, and political equality for all, with no
regard for right or wrong. Life, nasty, brutish, and short, whether just or unjust war of all against
all.
LOCKE : A state of good will, mutual existence, and preservation of peace rather than war
governed by natural law, but the state became necessary to have a single standardised interpretation
of natural law.
ROUSSEAU:
Men in their natural state are self-sufficient and contended, lived an idyllic life of happiness, man
is actuated (operated) by impulse rather than reason, the origin of property creates inequity and the
necessity of the state.
2. LAW OF NATURE:
HOBBES: There was no civil law in the state of nature; law of nature regulated human action; law
of nature was conceived differently by Hobbes to mean different things on different occasions,
namely (a) it was a dicate of right reason for the preservation of life. (b) It was founded on prudence,

1
Hume (2000) A Treatise of Human Nature In Baillie J, Hume on Morality, Pg.184
 5

which demanded that everyone try to secure peace by sacrificing natural rights by convenants, and
it must be respected.
LOCKE : The law of nature is a moral law based on reason that regulates human behaviour rather
than a natural impulse.
ROUSSEAU: Natural law based on instinctive sociability resulting from feeling rather than reason.
3. NATURAL RIGHT
HOBBES : Natural rights are dependent on one's
LOCKE : Natural rights are inherent in man; natural rights of man are to life, liberty, and property.
ROUSSEAU: states that man is free in his natural state and has all rights incidental to his person.

4. SOCIAL CONTRACT
HOBBES : Individuals give up all of their rights except the right to self-defense and self-preservation
to a common sovereign. A social contract creates a common wealth and a sovereign (one, few, or many)
contract that is unilateral and not binding on the sovereign. 2
LOCKE : Men enter into a social contract that creates a state to have a common agency for interpreting
and enforcing natural law. Individuals give up some but not all of their rights. It is unclear whether
Locke's contract creates civil society or just government. The government's authority is limited and not
absolute.
ROUSSEAU: The state is the result of a contract between individuals acting in their personal capacities
and individuals acting in their corporate capacities.

5. SOVEREIGNTY
HOBBES : Hobbesian sovereignty is unlimited, indivisible, inalienable, absolute above law, source of
law, justice, property above state, and the church has no right of revolution against the sovereign.
LOCKE : Locke does not believe in the concept of a sovereign state. His government is only
responsible for carrying out its responsibilities. The inherent right of man to life, liberty, and property
limits the power of government. Locke envisions popular rather than legal sovereignty.
ROUSSEAU: The corporate whole, i.e. the people as a whole, is sovereign. As a result, Rousseau
believes in popular sovereignty. The legal sovereign is the people. Sovereignty is vested in the people's
"general will." This sovereignty is distinguished by its unity, individuality, permanence, in alienability,
and absolute and unrepresentable nature. The government is reliant on the people's sovereign.
Rousseau makes a distinction between the sovereign state and subordinate government.

6. LIBERTY:
HOBBES : In its natural state, liberty is dependent on the state and is guaranteed by the state. It is a
state gift that can be revoked by the state. It cannot be used to undermine the authority of the state.
LOCKE : A man is born with certain rights, such as the right to life, liberty, and property, which the
state cannot take away from him. Individual liberty is a gift of the sovereign state.
ROUSSEAU: In the civil state. It must be reconciled with the state's absolute authority and cannot be
used against it.

2
Hobbes, Thomas. 1651a. Leviathan. C.B Macpherson (Editor). London: Penguin Books (1985)
 6

7. INDIVIDUAL AND THE STATE:

HOBBES : The Hobbesian individual owes everything to the state, including rights, peace, and the
rule of law, and is thus the best in the state. He is obligated to obey the sovereign and pay taxes.
Individuals have some form of liberty even in a civil state, such as (a) the right not to kill themselves
if ordered to do so by the sovereign. (b) Liberty to life, allowing him to resist the sovereign if he
attempts to take his life. (c) The right to refuse allegiance to a sovereign who is unable to save his life
or to a deposed sovereign. 3

1.6 COMPARISON BETWEEN HOBBES, LOCKE & ROUSSEAU

1. Hobbes asserts that without subjection to a common power in their rights and freedoms, guys are
always at war. Locke and Rousseau, at the contrary, set forth the view that the state exists to keep and
shield the herbal rights of its residents. When governments fail in that task, residents have the proper
and now and again the obligation to withdraw their aid or even to rebel.
2. Hobbes view become that regardless of the state does is just. All of society is an immediate advent
of the state, and a mirrored image of the need of the ruler. According to Locke, the handiest essential
position of the state is to make sure that justice is visible to be done. While Rousseau view is that the
State ought to in all situation make sure freedom and liberty of individuals.
3. Hobbes concept of Social Contract helps absolute sovereign without giving any fee to individuals,
whilst Locke and Rousseau helps man or woman than the state or the authorities.
4. To Hobbes, the sovereign and the authorities are same however Rousseau makes a difference among
the two. He guidelines out a consultant shape of authorities. But, Locke does now no longer make such
a difference.
5. Rousseaus view of sovereignty become a compromise among the constitutionalism of Locke and
absolutism of Hobbes.4

1.7 EVALUATION OF SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

The social contract theory as expounded through Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau does now no longer
give an explanation for the foundation of the state. There isn't any proof to aid this theory. The rivalry
of those philosophers isn't borne out through facts. What become contributed through Hobbes to
political philosophy become absolutism. Locke gave reputation to the theory of restrained government.
Rousseau popularised the concept of famous sovereignty. Rousseau had taken inspiration from Hobbes
and Locke. In fact, he began with Locke's method and ended with Hobbes'. Both Rousseau and Locke
agreed that man was free and happy in his natural state. The only way out was to form a civil society
through a contract. Both Locke and Rousseau distinguished between the state and government, though
Rousseau argued that the institution of government was not the result of a contract. Both believed that
the contract did not deprive the people of supreme power. The voice of Rousseau is that of Locke, but
the hands are those of Hobbes.

3
Hampton, Jean. 1986. Hobbes and the Social Contract Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4
Hobbes (2005) Sovereignty and Security’ In Cottingham, J (ed.), Western Philosophy: an anthology. Section 3, pg.481
 7

1.8 RELEVANCE OF SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY IN

CONTEMPERORY ERA
While traditional social contract theories are concerned with the origins of the state and society, modern
versions and revivals of social contract theories are not. The social contract that underpins modern
society arose as a means of addressing post-war problems. With a change in circumstances, the social
contract must be changed and updated. The global pandemic that began in 2020 and is still ongoing has
prompted the need for a new social contract. The United Nations (UN) proposed the renewal of the
social contract in Part II of "Our Common Agenda-Report of the Secretary-General." The following
are the pillars of the new social contract: 5

1. TRUST:
▪ The report makes the following recommendations to build trust and counter mistrust between people,
institutions, and different groups of society:
 Establishment of listening institutions: Governments should conduct national listening and visioning
exercises, as well as establish better ways of listening to the people they serve.
 Services: Governments are urged to invest in public systems and services, as well as to hire qualified
public employees.
 Justice and the rule of law: The Secretary advocated for a new vision of the law, recognising justice as
a necessary component of the social contract.
 Taxation: Governments should consider using taxation to reduce wealth inequalities.
 To combat corruption, tough measures must be implemented.
 Information in digital space: The United Nations could facilitate the development of a global code of
conduct that promotes the integrity of public information in collaboration with states, media outlets,
and regulatory bodies.

2. INCLUSION, PROTECTION AND PARTICIPATION

 Systems of social protection, such as Health Insurance for All
 Training and education
 Women and girls are prioritised, as is domestic peace.
 Adequate housing and digital inclusion are also priorities.

3. MEASURING AND VALUING WHAT MATTERS TO PEOPLE

AND THE PLANET

 Finding progress indicators that are not just GDP

 Implementing the most recent System of Environmental-Economic Accounting (SEEA)

5
Nozick, Robert. 1974. Anarchy, State and Utopia. New York: Basic Books.
 8

 Consider alternatives to GDP, such as the human development index, the inclusive wealth
index, the Genuine Progress Indicator, the multidimensional poverty index, and the inequality-
adjusted human development index.
 Finding ways to validate care and the informal economy, such as valuing unpaid care work and
investing in quality paid care as part of essential public services and social protection
arrangements.
 As a result, the report acknowledged the significance of renewing the social contract between
governments and their citizens, as well as within societies. It is time to rebuild trust and embrace
a comprehensive vision of human rights. 6

1.8 CRITICISMS ON SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

Given the longstanding and widespread influence of social contract theory, it is unsurprising that it has
been the target of numerous critiques from a variety of philosophical perspectives. Feminists and race-
conscious philosophers, in particular, have advanced compelling arguments about the substance and
viability of social contract theory.

A. FEMINIST ARGUEMENTS
Feminism, for the most part, defies simple or universal definitions. In general, feminists value women's
experiences and the impact that theories and practises have on women's lives. Given contract theory's
pervasive influence on social, political, and moral philosophy, it is not surprising that feminists have
a lot to say about whether contract theory is adequate or appropriate from a feminist standpoint of
seriously considering women.7. To survey all of the feminist responses to social contract theory would
extend far beyond the scope of this article. So I will focus on three of them:
i. The Sexual Contract
At least three paradigmatic contemporary contracts contain patriarchal control of women: the marriage
contract, the prostitution contract, and the contract for surrogate motherhood. Each of these contracts
is concerned with men's control of women, or the generalisation of a specific man's control of a specific
woman.
ii. The Nature of the Liberal Individual
Hobbes' conception of the liberal individual, which laid the groundwork for the dominant modern
conception of the person, is especially masculine in that it is conceived as atomistic and solitary,
deriving none of its qualities, or even its very existence, from any other person, particularly its mother.
Hobbes' human is thus radically unique in a way that is specifically due to the nature of modern
masculinity.
iii. Care Ethics

6
Held, Virginia. 1977. “Rationality and Reasonable Cooperation.” Social Research (Winter 1977): 708-744.
7
DiStefano, Christine. 1991. Configurations of Masculinity: A Feminist Perspective on Modern Political Theory. Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press.
 9

In general, social contract theory only goes so far as to define our rights and obligations. However,
this may not be sufficient to reveal the full extent of what it means to be a moral person, and how to
respond fully to others with whom one interacts through dependent relationships.

b. RACE-CONSCIOUS ARGUMENT
The racial contract is to some extent a meta-contract, which determines the bounds of personhood and
parameters of inclusion and exclusion in all the other contracts that come after it. It manifests itself
both formally and informally. It is an agreement, originally among European men in the beginning of
the modern period, to identify themselves as ‘white’ and therefore as fully human, and to identify all
others, in particular the natives with whom they were beginning to come into contact, as ‘other’: non-
white and therefore not fully human. So, race is not just a social construct, as others have argued, it is
more especially a political construct, created to serve a particular political end, and the political
purposes of a specific group. The contract allows some persons to treat other persons, as well as the
lands they inhabit, as resources to be exploited. The enslavement of millions of Africans and the
appropriation of the Americas from those who inhabited them, are examples of this racial contract at
work in history .8

1.7 CONCLUSION

In conclusion it might be tough to decide whether or not all our ethical duties might be justified with
the aid of using a Social Contract Theory. This argument touches on altruism which may be described
as a theory worried with selfless acts. It is Hobbes who argues towards this point, mentioning that
humans are commonly worried with themselves, leaving little interest for everybody else. Locke is
greater positive approximately human nature and of ethical reasoning; however, loads of his
perspectives are subsidized up with faith making them much less plausible to a few readers. Both
Hobbes and Locke cleverly provide an explanation for that our ethical duties may be justified with the
aid of using portraying lifestyles without policies and regulations. This state of nature’ is an outstanding
concept test to look how we might act and behave, however most significantly whether or not our
concepts could change. Both Hume and Rousseau deliver a greater convincing and positive view of
human nature. Hume didn’t take the contract or the consent trouble so actually and defined that we're
obviously impelled to abide with the aid of using the policies of society and preserve our ethical
responsibilities due to the fact without them society could collapse. Our ethical duties and
responsibilities are with the aid of using nature complicated and may be justified in some of ways, and
the Social Contract Theory might be simply one in all them. Finally, I outline the implications of this
study on research, strategy making, and other book references.

8
https://www.researchgate. (last visited on 26/03/22)
 10

1.8 BIBLIOGRAPHY
o “Introduction to the Social Contract Theory” by Louise Rusling
o “Introduction to Political Theory” by O. P. Gauba
o IGNOU Political science notes.
o http://www.jstor.org
o https://www.researchgate.