Social Contract Theory
June 16, 2014
Social Contract Theory
This essay will give an evaluation on the social contract theory of John Locke and how these values identify with the consistency of the criminal justice system and private settings. This essay will discuss whether or not the values and principles will apply to both venues. This essay will also include a summary of the major differences of the social contract theories. This essay will provide a discussion of the key principle associated with Locke’s social contract theory; it will determine how these principles inculcated in the United States Bill of Rights. This essay will show how the principles will play out in the criminal justice system and security settings; last it will describe freedom in relationship to personal rights, ethical standards, and obligations. According to (Souryal, 2007) John Locke’s social contract theory refers to the views of individuals, groups, government, and community. Social contract theory deals with the association with modern moral and political theory, which gives an exposition and defense by Locke’s colleague Thomas Hobbes. Locke’s theory also believes mankind’s natural condition pertains to the state of complete and perfect liberty and individuals will conduct in his or her life as he or she sees fit from the interpretation of others. Locke’s theory does not give an individual the freedom to do as he or she chooses, even if he or she believes it is in his or her best interest. The state of nature will not deal with civil power or regime that will penalize a person for his or her judgment for his or her lack of correct judgment for the laws in which it proves one individual has no morals. An individual is under the assumption that each individual is equal to the next individual. Therefore, each individual has the capability of defining the Law of Nature, the implications with the law of nature say that individuals will have limits on the amount of property he or she can own; an individual should not take more than he or she needs from nature than he or she can use, will leave other individuals without enough resources for him or her to survive on (Powell, 1996). Summarize the Differences
The difference between John Locke’s natural rights and traditional republicanism are focal points. The traditional republicanism will emphasize on the need for mutual understanding above what a person will expect in the importance of the citizens. Some people lean on his or her understanding more toward John Locke’s natural rights because Locke describes his state of nature as a fictitious his situation, which the government is not ready to handle or because it does not exist. John Locke has the belief that existence of the Law of Nature is to live by which everyone obliges. Not one person should cause harm to his or her life, liberty, health, and possessions. The key ideologies of natural rights philosophy are within The United States Declaration of Independence, which has various ideas consent about the government, rights of revolution, and social contract. The classical republicanism has the similarity of the Roman Republic, which its government will provide the citizens with liberty through the government and place emphasis on common goods or the best interest in society as a whole (Powell, 1996). Some people who share the same republic should exhibit various similarities of beliefs, such as moral education, civil benefits, and research in a uniform or close nit city. The civil welfare shows when a person allows his or her own goodness, which goes above and beyond his or her own beliefs or needs so that he or she will ensure that the next person is taken care of. The research findings and proper teaching will show that a classical republic will change an individual or person’s freedom. The moral thought of hypothesis will suggest citizens will need to learn how to be virtuous with the basis of a...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document