School #188

Social Contract Theory

Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, John Rawls, David Gauthier

Social Contract theory holds that the legitimacy of political authority — and of the moral rules enforced by it — derives from the consent, actual or hypothetical, of those subject to it. Thomas Hobbes's 'Leviathan' (1651) argued that rational individuals in a pre-political state of nature, where life is 'solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short', would alienate their natural right of self-defence to an absolute sovereign in exchange for security. John Locke's 'Second Treatise of Government' (1689) recast the contract as a limited trust: persons retain inalienable rights to life, liberty, and property, and government that violates these rights forfeits its legitimacy. Jean-Jacques Rousseau's 'Du Contrat Social' (1762) reconceived the contract as the constitution of a collective general will (volonté générale) in which freedom and law coincide. After a long eclipse the tradition was decisively revived by John Rawls's 'A Theory of Justice' (1971), whose thought experiment of the original position behind a veil of ignorance generates principles of justice all parties could rationally accept. David Gauthier's 'Morals by Agreement' (1986) developed a Hobbesian variant grounding morality in mutually advantageous bargaining; T.M. Scanlon's 'What We Owe to Each Other' (1998) provides a contractualist account of interpersonal morality.

Worldview

The contractarian inhabits a world in which legitimate authority must be earned, not inherited or imposed, and in which every coercive institution stands under a permanent demand for justification to those who live under it. The fundamental orientation is one of reflective self-government: political order is what free and equal persons would agree to if they reasoned carefully about how to live together. The contractarian is therefore congenitally suspicious of appeals to tradition, divine right, or natural hierarchy as sources of authority that bypass consent. The framework classifies this as None: the social-contract tradition is in the main a secular and rationalist programme that locates the source of political legitimacy in human reason and agreement rather than in any cosmic-ordering principle or personal deity, although Locke famously appealed to a Christian theology of natural rights and Kant retained a residual providentialism. The framework reads this as Constructed moral authority: political and moral norms are products of agreement (actual or hypothetical) among rational persons, justified by what reasonable parties could accept rather than by scripture, tradition, or pure reason in isolation. The contractarian thus combines a strong universalism about the form of justification with a constructivist humility about the content of the principles that emerge from it.

Moral Implications

Contractarian ethics generates strong duties of non-coercion, fair cooperation, and respect for the rights necessary to participate in the cooperative scheme. It is congenial to liberal-democratic constitutionalism, the rule of law, and the protection of individual rights against majoritarian encroachment. Rawls's difference principle — that inequalities are just only if they benefit the worst-off — supplies the tradition's most influential distributive criterion. Contractarianism has been criticised from feminist, communitarian, and post-colonial perspectives for assuming an abstract, free-standing rational chooser and for excluding from the contracting circle those (children, the severely disabled, non-human animals, future generations) who cannot reciprocate; contemporary work has attempted to extend the framework to address these cases.

Practical Implications

Contract theory has shaped constitutional design from the U.S. Bill of Rights to the European human-rights regime; it underwrites the standard practice of justifying coercive policy by appeal to the consent or reasonable acceptability of those affected. In bioethics, contractualist reasoning shapes principles of informed consent and the just allocation of scarce medical resources. In contemporary politics it provides the theoretical backbone of public-reason liberalism — the demand that fundamental political decisions be justifiable to all reasonable citizens — and of constitutional theories of judicial review. The tradition's practical limits are most visible at the boundaries of the contracting community: refugees, future generations, and the global poor remain test cases.

I. Time

Time is substantival, one-dimensional, linear, continuous, and non-deterministic. The contract itself is largely hypothetical and a-historical — it is a heuristic device for justification rather than a dated historical event — but the political orders it justifies unfold in ordinary historical time. Locke and Rousseau differ from Hobbes in seeing a real developmental sequence from pre-political condition to civil society, but the binding force of the contract does not depend on its actual historical occurrence.

Attributes
Extent: Infinite Ontological Status: Substantival Grain: Continuous Freedom: Non-Deterministic Traversability: Linear Dimensionality: One Direction: Uni-directional

II. Space

Space is substantival, finite, flat, and local — the ordinary territorial space within which political authority is exercised. The contract presupposes a bounded jurisdiction within which the sovereign's writ runs and outside which it does not, which is why contractarian theory has historically been uncomfortable with questions of international justice (a discomfort that Rawls's 'The Law of Peoples' [1999] sought to address).

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Curvature: Flat Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

III. Matter

Matter is substantival, finite, three-dimensional, conserved, and local in the standard modern sense. The contractarian tradition takes for granted the material world of bodies, resources, and territories and is concerned chiefly with the rules under which these are to be held, exchanged, and protected. Locke's labour theory of property and Rawls's principles for the distribution of social primary goods both presuppose a finite material world that must be allocated under conditions of moderate scarcity.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dimensionality: Three Locality: Local

IV. Observer

The contractarian observer is a rational individual capable of representing her own interests and recognising the rational interests of others. In the canonical thought experiments she is stripped to her bare rational capacities — Rawls puts her behind a veil that conceals her social position, talents, and conception of the good — in order to expose the principles that anyone in her position would have reason to accept. Agency is active: the legitimacy of political order depends on the (actual or hypothetical) reasoned assent of each subject. Observers are plural and formally equal in the contracting situation, even where they differ widely in actual capacities. Knowledge is mediated and partial in the lived world but is artificially equalised in the device of the contract.

Attributes
Time Instance: Single Space Instance: Single Extent of Knowledge: Mediated Retainment of Knowledge: Partial Physicality: Embodied Agency: Active Number: Plural Metaphysical Agency: None Moral Authority: Constructed Theological Method: N/A

V. Energy

Energy is substantival, finite, conserved, and irreversibly dispersible in the standard physical sense. The contractarian tradition has no distinctive metaphysics of energy; its concern with material resources extends naturally to energetic ones, and contemporary contractarian work on intergenerational justice (notably the just-savings principle in Rawls) addresses the equitable distribution of the planet's finite energetic inheritance.

Attributes
Extent: Finite Ontological Status: Substantival Conservation: Conserved Dispersibility: Irreversible

VI. Information

Information is emergent and conserved in the social sense: the rules of justice, once established, are recorded in constitutions, statutes, and the working understandings of institutions. The contractarian tradition is unusually attentive to informational conditions — Rawls's veil of ignorance is precisely a stipulation about what information may enter political reasoning, and Gauthier's bargaining theory assumes specific informational symmetries between contracting parties. Personal informational conservation is denied: the tradition is generally secular in temperament, with no doctrine of personal survival, though Locke combined his contract theory with a Christian eschatology.

Attributes
Ontological Status: Emergent Cosmic Conservation: Conserved Personal Conservation: Non-conserved Granularity: Continuous
← #187 Social Democracy All Schools #189 Marxism →

Works that name Social Contract Theory in their embodiments

Foundational texts that draw on this school, with each work's declared weight.

6%
Leviathan
Thomas Hobbes · 1651
6%
An Essay Concerning Human Understanding
John Locke · 1689 (first ed.); fourth ed. with significant revisions 1700
6%
De Cive (Early)
Thomas Hobbes · 1642 (Latin, Paris); English translation by Hobbes himself 1651
6%
Two Treatises of Government (Late)
John Locke · Written c. 1679–82; published anonymously 1689
6%
A Letter Concerning Toleration (Late)
John Locke · Written in Latin 1685 in Holland; published anonymously 1689 (Latin and English)
6%
The Social Contract (Late (after the two Discourses; the political conclusion of Rousseau's mature thought))
Jean-Jacques Rousseau · 1762
6%
Émile (Late)
Jean-Jacques Rousseau · 1762 (published the same year as the Social Contract; both condemned and burned by authorities)
6%
Discourse on the Origin of Inequality (Mid (between the First Discourse and the Social Contract))
Jean-Jacques Rousseau · 1755 (submitted to the 1754 essay competition of the Académie de Dijon, on the question of the origin and justification of inequality)
6%
Some Thoughts Concerning Education (Late)
John Locke · 1693
6%
The Reasonableness of Christianity (Late)
John Locke · 1695
6%
Discourse on the Sciences and Arts (Early (the work that launched Rousseau's career))
Jean-Jacques Rousseau · 1750 (Discours sur les sciences et les arts, Geneva)
6%
Julie (Mature (the literary high-point of Rousseau's career, between Social Contract and Émile))
Jean-Jacques Rousseau · 1761 (Julie, ou la Nouvelle Héloïse: Lettres de deux amants, habitants d'une petite ville au pied des Alpes, Amsterdam)
6%
Reveries of the Solitary Walker (Last (composed in Rousseau's final two years, after he had retreated from public life))
Jean-Jacques Rousseau · 1776-78 (unfinished at Rousseau's death; published posthumously 1782)
6%
Elements of Law, Natural and Politic (Early)
Thomas Hobbes · 1640
6%
De Corpore (Late)
Thomas Hobbes · 1655
6%
De Homine (Late)
Thomas Hobbes · 1658
6%
Behemoth (Late)
Thomas Hobbes · c. 1668; 1681 (posthumous)

How Social Contract Theory resolves each dilemma

56 resolved positions across 4 dimensions, including 7 distinctive where the majority of schools go the other way · 1 unaligned.

Each dimension is sorted so minority positions come first. Mainstream positions are folded into an expandable list.

Time · 9 dilemmas, all mainstream

Matter · 7 dilemmas · 4 distinctive

What stuff is — fundamental, relational, or appearance.

Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
What is money?
The question of what money is — a measured store of real value, an agreed-on practice, a relational ledger of debts, or just a name we apply to many different things — sits behind every argument about inflation, cryptocurrency, debt, and the state.
Money is a social practice — its content is what we make it.
On this view, money is exactly what societies do that performs the monetary functions. There is no fact about whether something is 'really' money beyond whether it is used as money. A community that decides shell beads or carbon credits or proof-of-work hashes count as …
Roads not taken Money is a real institution with intrinsic features. (54%) · Money is the ledger of obligations among real people. (15%) · “Money” names a family of practices — the definition question is nominal. (8%)
Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
What is a nation?
Whether a nation is a real moral community with intrinsic character, a constructed legal-political artifact, a web of kinship and shared history, an imagined community, or a conventional partition of a deeper unity — these are real ontological positions with sharply different political downstream.
A nation is a constructed polity — a project, not a discovery.
On this view, nations are made: by treaties, by wars, by deliberate institution-building, by the slow work of collective practice. There is nothing intrinsic about a national kind; what exists is the practice. What we owe the nation is what we owe any institution we …
Roads not taken A nation is a real moral community with intrinsic character. (54%) · A nation is the web of kinship, ancestry, and shared land that hosts a people. (15%) · “Nation” names a family of practices imaginatively held together. (8%)
Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
What makes someone male or female?
Whether sex is a real biological kind, a constructed social category, a relational identity, a label applied to varied phenomena, or a conventional distinction within a deeper unity is the ontological question the contemporary dispute about gender is mostly about.
Gender is constructed; what counts as male or female reflects practice.
On this view, while biological features exist, what they socially mean — what counts as a man or a woman, what roles attach, how the categories are policed and revised — is the work of social practice. The categories are real but constructed; revising them …
Roads not taken Sex is a real biological kind with given content. (54%) · Sex and gender are constituted by relations of recognition. (15%) · “Male” and “female” are family-resemblance terms — no single essence. (8%)
Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
Should we edit the human germline?
Whether human nature is a given biological kind, a constructed category, a relational achievement, a family-resemblance cluster, or a conventional distinction within deeper unity is the ontological question the policy debate over heritable gene editing is mostly about.
The categories we count as 'human' are emergent from practice; germline editing is a practice-revision like any other.
On this view, biological facts about the genome exist, but what we count as 'human nature' is downstream of practice. The germline is one more thing humans now have technical access to; the question is not whether the practice transgresses an essence but whether the …
Roads not taken Human nature is a real biological kind given by reproductive biology or by creation; editing the germline transgresses what is given. (54%) · Personhood is constituted by relations of descent and kinship; germline editing reshapes the relational fabric. (15%) · 'Human nature' is a cluster term without a single essence; the editing question is empirical, not metaphysical. (8%)
3 mainstream positions

Observer · 37 dilemmas · 3 distinctive

Mind, agency, and the knower's relation to the known.

Distinctive · only 8% of schools agree (17/202)
Is truth universal, tradition-bound, situated, or constructed?
What kind of thing is a true claim, and how does it relate to the standpoint from which it is made?
What counts as truth is constituted by language, practice, history, power.
There is no fact-of-the-matter independent of the constitutive frameworks; truth is constructed.
Roads not taken Truth is mind-independent, universal, accessible in principle to all. (65%) · Truth is real but always known from a perspective. (16%) · Truth is real but accessible only from within a tradition. (10%)
Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
When does a person begin?
The political question of abortion sits atop an older ontological one: at what point does there exist a someone — a being with moral standing — rather than merely the materials from which one will form?
A person comes into being gradually, as the capacities of a mind develop.
On this view, personhood is not a status conferred at a moment but a property of beings with certain capacities — to feel, to suffer, to prefer, eventually to reflect. A zygote has none of these; a late-term fetus has many; a newborn has most. …
Roads not taken A person exists from conception — when a new being comes into existence. (54%) · Personhood is conferred by being-in-relation. (15%) · The question presupposes a fact of the matter that isn’t there. (8%)
Distinctive · only 16% of schools agree (32/202)
What is marriage?
Behind every disagreement about how marriage should be defined is a prior disagreement about what kind of thing it is — a given order to be recognized, a practice to be negotiated, or a web of relations to be woven.
Marriage is a practice we shape — its content is what we make it.
On this view, marriage is a human institution shaped by law, custom, and the agreements of those who enter it. There is no fixed essence to discover, only practices to negotiate. As societies change — granting women legal personhood, recognizing no-fault divorce, extending the institution …
Roads not taken Marriage has a given form — it’s a kind of thing we recognize, not make. (54%) · Marriage is constituted by the web of relations it creates. (15%) · “Marriage” names a family of practices — the definition question is nominal. (8%)
33 mainstream positions
Could causation work backwards? Causation runs one way — the arrow of time is real and structural. 68% Is the asymmetry between memory and anticipation a real feature of time, or just of us? The asymmetry is real because time itself has a real direction. 68% Is the arrow of time a real feature of the cosmos, or only of how we describe it? The arrow is real and structural; the asymmetry isn't an artifact of description. 68% Is environmental damage ever truly permanent? Damage is real and permanent on the relevant timescales. There is no recovery; there is only limitation. 66% Can a civilization recover from collapse? Civilizational complexity is hard to build and easy to lose; recovery is at best partial. 66% Does the second law of thermodynamics mean something morally? Entropy is what time is. The moral weight, if any, is the weight of working against the current. 66% Does environmental harm in another country bind me morally? Moral obligation tracks the relations one is in; distance does matter, structurally. 50% Can prayer for someone far away affect them? Prayer changes the pray-er, not the prayed-for. 49% Are coincidences ever more than coincidence? Coincidence is exactly what the math says it is. The pattern is in the noticer. 49% What is our place in nature? Active in a real nature — we cultivate, steward, transform. 48% Should we colonize space? Cultivating worlds beyond Earth is the next form of stewardship. 48% Is genetic engineering of food stewardship or domination? Genetic modification is cultivation by other means. 48% Is divine omniscience compatible with human freedom? The observer is in time; foreknowledge across times raises real freedom problems. 46% Does meditation reveal something genuinely timeless? Meditators are bounded observers reporting unusual brain states; the 'timeless' is metaphorical. 46% Does prayer change God's mind? If there is an addressee at all, it is in time; prayer is communication, and may genuinely change what comes next. 46% Are the dead morally present to the living? Observers are bounded by their own moment, and no further agency makes the dead present. 44% What kind of religious-theological authority does the tradition recognize? The category does not apply — the school is non-religious. 44% Who is the moral primary — the individual, the community, the cosmos, the class, or the species? The discrete person is the moral primary. 40% Is reality fundamentally digital? No — continuous fields, classical limits, analog deep structure. 37% Are there indivisible units of experience? No — continuous Jamesian stream, phenomenological lived time. 37% Is memory stored or reconstructed? Reconstructed — continuous re-narrating, no fixed engrams. 37% Does history have a direction or meaning? History is not where the deepest truth lives. 37% What makes someone the same person over time? You are your body — continuity is bodily continuity. 36% Is the late-stage dementia patient still the person their spouse married? Same body, same person — even when the cognitive pattern has changed. 36% If a teleporter copied and destroyed you, would you have survived? Different body, different person — you died in the scanner. 36% Do animals have moral standing comparable to humans? Animal minds are real because biology is the substrate of mind. 32% Could a fetal brain organoid in a petri dish be conscious? Brain tissue can in principle do what brains do; the question is integration. 32% What happens to "you" when you die? Death is genuinely the end. 30% Could an AI have a mind that matters? No — mind is what a biological brain does, and an LLM has no brain. 30% How is knowledge of reality produced? Through a priori reasoning and conceptual demonstration. 25% Should we trust expert testimony when we can't verify it? Trust the practice, not the practitioner. 14% Is religious revelation a real source of knowledge? 'Revelation' is a category communities construct for what counts as authoritative. 14% Does an LLM 'know' the things it correctly produces? Whether an LLM 'knows' is the constructive question the practice has to answer. 14%
1 unaligned
Information · 4 dilemmas, all mainstream
Jump to school (202)
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8 #9 #10 #11 #12 #13 #14 #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 #25 #26 #27 #28 #29 #30 #31 #32 #33 #34 #35 #36 #37 #38 #39 #40 #41 #42 #43 #44 #45 #46 #47 #48 #49 #50 #51 #52 #53 #54 #55 #56 #57 #58 #59 #60 #61 #62 #63 #64 #65 #66 #67 #68 #69 #70 #71 #72 #73 #74 #75 #76 #77 #78 #79 #80 #81 #82 #83 #84 #85 #86 #87 #88 #89 #90 #91 #92 #93 #94 #95 #96 #97 #98 #99 #100 #101 #102 #103 #104 #105 #106 #107 #108 #109 #110 #111 #112 #113 #114 #115 #116 #117 #118 #119 #120 #121 #122 #123 #124 #125 #126 #127 #128 #129 #130 #131 #132 #133 #134 #135 #136 #137 #138 #139 #140 #141 #142 #143 #144 #145 #146 #147 #148 #149 #150 #151 #152 #153 #154 #155 #156 #157 #158 #159 #160 #161 #162 #163 #164 #165 #166 #167 #168 #169 #170 #171 #172 #173 #174 #175 #176 #177 #178 #179 #180 #181 #182 #183 #184 #185 #186 #187 #188 #189 #190 #191 #192 #193 #194 #195 #196 #197 #198 #199 #200 #201 #202