The social contract is the idea that defines how people should create a system of order while living together. This idea argues that every individual must give up some of their freedoms and come together to create rules and laws in order to maintain social order. According to social contract theory, people may have to give up certain rights while living in society; in return, they gain rights such as security, justice, and protection from society and the state. This concept holds an important place in debates about why societies must live in order and how states can be considered legitimate.

History and Contributors

The idea of the social contract has been an important part of philosophical thought and was particularly developed by many philosophers in the 17th and 18th centuries. Leading among these thinkers are Thomas Hobbes, John Locke, and Jean-Jacques Rousseau.

• Thomas Hobbes (1588–1679), in his work Leviathan, argued that humans in their natural state are completely independent and selfish. According to Hobbes, human nature is chaotic and dangerous; people live in a constant state of threat to protect their own interests. He believed that in order for people to live peacefully, a strong state is necessary, and the state must limit individuals’ freedoms to ensure their security.
• John Locke (1632–1704), on the other hand, adopted a different approach from Hobbes. Locke argued that people have certain “natural rights” from birth, including the right to life, liberty, and property. According to Locke, people form a state to protect these rights, and the power of the state is limited. His social contract emphasizes that the state exists solely based on the consent of the people.
• Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778), in his work The Social Contract, further developed the idea of the social contract by defending the collective will of society. While Rousseau claimed that people should return to their free nature, he emphasized that this could only be possible in a social order based on the will of the people. He argued that the social contract should reflect the general will (the will of the people).

^{Thomas Hobbes - John Locke - Jean-Jacques Rousseau}

Core Assumptions of Social Contract Theory

Social contract theory generally assumes that people are independent and self-interested beings. This assumption describes a state known as the “state of nature.” The “state of nature” refers to a condition where people are completely free and not subject to any government or law. In this condition, individuals consider only their own interests, which can lead to chaos and conflict.

According to the social contract, people come together to move out of this state of nature and create a more orderly and secure life. However, to ensure this order, they must give up some of their freedoms. This is an agreement accepted by individuals to avoid harming one another and to maintain social peace.

The Effects of the Social Contract on Society

The idea of the social contract is not only about individuals giving up some freedoms. It also concerns the legitimacy of the state and how social order is maintained. According to Rousseau’s view of the social contract, the power of the state is based on the will of the people, and this is necessary to create a social order in which individual freedoms are best protected. Locke emphasized that the state’s duty is to protect the natural rights of the people, adopting an approach that limits state power.

The Social Contract and the Legitimacy of the State

Social contract theory grounds the legitimacy of the state solely on its acceptance by the people. While Hobbes viewed the state as a necessity, thinkers like Locke and Rousseau argued that a state cannot exist without the consent of the people. This approach has contributed to the modern democratic idea that the state should be shaped by the will of the people.

Social Contract and Evolutionary Social Sciences

Social sciences such as evolutionary biology and anthropology question some of the assumptions on which social contract theory is based. Research on small-scale societies shows that people can live orderly lives not only through formal institutions but also through social norms and traditions. In these societies, people have managed to live together and maintain social order without a state or laws.

For example, in Darwin’s work The Descent of Man, he points out that social skills such as cooperation, loyalty, and empathy played an important role in survival among primitive tribes. Darwin argues that social bonds are one of the key factors that help people survive and improve intergroup relations. This presents a view that opposes the initial assumptions of social contract theory. Historically, people have survived by cooperating, and these social bonds have been shaped by the evolution of human history.

Criticism of Social Contract Theories

The “state of nature” assumption underlying social contract theory is incompatible with today’s social sciences. Humans do not live only for individual gain; on the contrary, social bonds and mutual support are essential parts of human life. Contrary to what social contract theory suggests, people are not purely selfish and egoistic beings in the state of nature. Therefore, the legitimacy of the state cannot be explained solely by individual consent.

In his book A Theory of Justice, John Rawls took the idea of the social contract to a more abstract level and discussed the fundamental principles of social justice. Rawls set aside the state of nature and argued that certain principles of justice must be applied for societies to live in a fair order. This shows that the legitimacy of the state should not rest only on a contract but also be supported by universal values such as justice and equality.

Brian Skyrms, on the other hand, viewed the social contract as a weak agreement arising from the dynamic interactions of individuals in society. This approach acknowledges the existence of a social order that is not based on an initial theoretical contract but on people continuously interacting and managing to live together. Skyrms argues that initial conditions and social interactions play a more important role in the formation of social order.