David Gauthier`s „neo-Hobbesian“ theory holds that cooperation between two independent and selfish parties is in fact possible, especially when it comes to understanding morality and politics. [19] Gauthier points in particular to the advantages of cooperation between two parties when it comes to challenging the prisoner`s dilemma. He suggests that if two parties respected the originally agreed agreement and morality set out in the contract, both parties would achieve an optimal result. [19] [20] In his social contract model, factors such as trust, rationality and self-interest keep each party honest and prevent them from breaking the rules. [19] [20] The central assertion that addresses the theory of social contracts is that law and political order are not natural, but human creations. The social contract and the political order it creates are only the means to an end – the benefit of the individuals involved – and are legitimate only to the extent that they fulfill their part of the agreement. Hobbes argued that the government is not a party to the original treaty and that citizens are not obliged to submit to the government if it is too weak to act effectively to suppress factionism and civil unrest. According to other social contract theorists, if the government does not guarantee their natural rights (locke) or respond to the best interests of society (called by Rousseau „general will“), citizens can withdraw their obligation to obey or change direction through elections or other means, including, if necessary, violence. Locke believed that natural rights were inalienable and that, therefore, the reign of God replaced governmental authority, while Rousseau believed that democracy (self-government) was the best way to ensure well-being while preserving individual freedom within the framework of the rule of law. The Lockean concept of the social contract was cited in the United States Declaration of Independence. Social contract theories were eclipsed in favor of utilitarianism, Hegelianism, and Marxism in the 19th century; they were revived in the 20th century, especially in the form of a thought experiment by John Rawls. [5] The social contract was seen as an „event“ in which individuals came together and exercised some of their individual rights so that others would cede their rights.

[12] This led to the establishment of the state, a sovereign entity, like individuals under his rule, that would create laws regulating social interactions. .

  Posted in: Allgemein