Social Contract Theory of Thomas Hobbes

SUBMITTED BY- Hiya Bharali

UID- SF0121023

Faculty in Charge –

Dr. MAYENGBAM NANDKISHWOR SINGH

NATIONAL LAW UNIVERSITY AND JUDICIAL ACADEMY, ASSAM

 Table of Contents

TOPICS

1.Social Contract Theory

2. Views of Thomas Hobbes on Social Contract Theory

2.1. Hobbes Description of the State of Nature

2.2. Criticism of Hobbes Views

3. Conclusion
There are various theories concerning the beginnings of the State. Social Contract theory played
a very important role of the modern political theory and practice.

Thomas Hobbes ( 1588-1679) a great English Philosopher who lived in the days of the Civil War
(1642- 1651) laid down some views regarding the Social Contract Theory.

1. SOCIAL CONTRACT THEORY

According to Social Contract Theory , the state was not created by God. This theory offers an
explanation for the origin of the state and shows the relationship between those who govern
and those who are governed. There are differences of opinion among the exponents of the
theory. But the essential idea is that the State is a human creation the result of a contract. This
theory states that the society or the state came into being by a contract that was made
between the individual and the society or the contract that was made amongst the individual
people.

In political discussion two forms of the theory are found i.e , the Governmental contract and
the Social contract proper. The first postulates a tracit agreement between the Government and the
people; and the second, the institution of a political society by means of a compact among individuals. 1

It is a mechanical theory which starts with the assumption that prior to the organization of the
state men lived in “ a state of nature “ It deals with two fundamental assumptions – first a
state “ a state of nature “, second a contract . 2

Hooker was the first scientific writer who gave a first logical exposition of the theory of social
contract.

2. VIEWS OF THOMAS HOBBES

Hobbes never had a mind to propound a theory regarding the origin of the state . Hobbes was
inclined towards absolutism. This inclination was natural at a time when the most important

need of his country was a strong Government to maintain law and order. Thus Thomas Hobbes
establish their thesis on Social Contract Theory from the beginning of human habitation.

. 1 Appadorai, A ( 1 August 1974). Hobbes . New Delhi. Oxford University Press

2
Agarwal, R.C ( n.d ). The contract theory, New Delhi .S Chand
 Hobbes is an exponent of absolute monarchy. According to Hobbes, people surrendered all
their powers to the king. Hobbes believed that a government headed by a king was the best
form that the sovereign could take. Placing all power in the hands of a king would mean more
resolute and consistent exercise of political authority, Hobbes argued .

HOBBES DESCRIPTION OF THE STATE OF NATURE

Hobbes starts his political enquiry ( The Leviathan, 1651) with an analysis of human nature :
man is essentially selfish ; he is move to action not by his intellect or reasons, but by his
appetites, desires and passions.3 Everybody was self centered and nobody bothered about
others and their interest. According to Hobbes, the State of Nature was the state of savagery
and human life, as he says was , “ solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short”.4According to
Hobbes in the State of Nature man’s condition was deplorable. It was the state of wild savagery
in which the guiding principle was “ might is right “. To Hobbes the state of nature was a state
of war – not war in the organized sense but a perpetual struggle of all against all, competition,
diffidence ; a state in which nothing could be just and force fraud were two cardinal virtues.” So
that in the nature of man”, says Hobbes “ we find three principles of quarrel- first competition

secondly diffidence, thirdly, glory. The first maketh man invade for gain, the second for safety,
the third for reputation.5 He further adds, “ During the time men live without common power
to keep them all in awe, they are in that condition there is no place for industry…. No culture….
No navigation…. No commodious building …. No society…. The life of man was solitary, poor,
nasty , brutish and short “.6

3
. Appadorai, A ( 1 August 1974). Hobbes . New Delhi. Oxford University Press

4.
Agarwal, R.C ( n.d ). Hobbes description of the state of NATURE . New Delhi .S Chand

5.
Hobbes : “ Leviathan “, Part I, Ch 13 , p 64

6.
Agarwal, R.C ( n.d ). Hobbes description of the state of nature New Delhi .S Chand
Hobbes believed that in man’s natural state, moral ideas do not exist. Thus in speaking of
human nature, he defines good simply as that which people desire and evil as that which they
avoid, atleast in the state of nature. Hobbes emphasizes the free and equal condition of man in
the state of nature, as he states that hath made men so equal in the faculties of mind and body.

The difference between man and man is not so considerable.

What Hobbes calls the first law of nature, for instance, is in the absence of a higher authority to
adjudicate disputes, everyone fears and mistrusts everyone else, and there can be no justice,
commerce or culture. That unsustainable condition comes to an end when individuals agree in
a social contract to relinquish their natural rights to everything and to transfer their self-
sovereignty to a higher civil authority, or Leviathan.

Hobbes believe that people entered into a contract in order to protect their life and maintain
peace. “ The state is established by a convenant of every man with every man in such a manner
as if every man should say to every man. “ I will authorize and give up the Right of Governing
myself”, recommend Hobbes, “ to this man or to his assembly of men on his condition that thou
give up the right to him and Authorize all his actions in like manner”.7

A State is thus created from Hobbes Social Contract perspective certain consequences follow in
this manner :

1. It is a social contract and so the sovereign is not a party to it . People authorized and gave up
rights of governing themselves to the Sovereign who came into being as a result of this
contract.

2. According to Hobbes, man, by nature, is not a social animal and so he nourishes in himself
anti-social feelings which can be suppressed only by absolute monarchy and so it becomes
essential for the sovereign to become a despot.

3. Sovereignty is inalienable, for it is essential to civil government that there should be no

power in the State strong enough to gainsay the sovereign. For the same reason, sovereignty is

7.
Ibid Pg 89
indivisible and the sovereign is unpunishable.

4. According to Hobbes, liberty consist in :

(a) Whatever the sovereign, that is, the law of the land had not forbidden; and 8

(b) What could not by the nature of the original pact, be given up, i.e., the right of self
preservation which could not be surrendered “ without justice, therefore , the individual may “,
says Dunnings, “ in disobedience of the sovereign’s command refuse to kill himself, resist
assault, refuse to accuse himself of an offence that would jeopardize his life and with certain
qualifications refuse to serve in the army”.9

5. The conditions of the contract clearly indicate that Hobbes supported the establishment of
despotic monarchy an demanded the unlimited authority of the Sovereign. “ If the Sovereign
commands a man, to kill, wound or maim himself; or not to resist those that assault him, or to
abstain from the use of food, air, medicine or any other thing, without which he cannot live, yet
hath that man the liberty to disobey”.10

CRITICISM OF HOBBES VIEWS

Hobbes “ Leviathan “ has been criticized by all the groups of political thinkers in England. All the
sections of English society criticized this book because it does not deal with the rights of
people. Hobbes bases an absolute State on ‘ free’ contract and consent ; the psychological basis
of this theory is fear. These ideas of Hobbes have been criticized from several points of view.
Hobbes has pointed out that man is quarrelsome and selfish by nature but he is not so.

8.
Agarwal, R.C ( n.d ). Hobbes contract and its implication. New Delhi .S Chand

9.
Dunning, Archibald ( William) ( 1905). Forms of Government. London. MACMILLAN & CO

10.
Hobbes : “ Leviathan”, Part II, Ch 21, p. 114
Professor Laski is the opinion that “Hobbes legal view of rights is insufficient for political
philosophy.”11 The church fathers condemned “ Leviathan” for eliminating God’s role in
mandating morality and establishing political authority. The conditions in the primitive stage
were not so deplorable has been described by Hobbes. Hobbes found no distinction between
the government and the state. According to Professor Willoughby, it was the greatest fault of
Hobbes. “The cardinal fault of Hobbes” , says Professor Willoughby, “ is the utter failure to
distinguish between the two conceptions of the state and government” .12

CONCLUSION

No doubt Hobbes views are severely criticized by some political thinkers yet their merits cannot
be ignored and overlooked. Hobbes was the first Englishman to present “ a logical system of
political philosophy”. As Ivor Brown puts it, he was the first great philosopher of discipline .He
attempted to make it very clear that law and order was most essential for the smooth running
of the state. Though Hobbes theory was undemocratic It was he who first of all presented
before us the concept Legal Sovereign.

11.
Professor Laski : “ Grammar of Politics”

12
Professor Willoughby: “ The Nature of State “ , p. 73.