Talk:Social contract

no contract may be valid without the knowing AND willing consent of all parties. Besides the accident of birth and lack of alternatives, a person may not consent for any number of other reasons and still reemain stuck. in the final analysis we are all treated as slaves. I imagine everyone wants A social contract to enable the common benefits of society but to be held to one at random that you happen to be in can be said to be nothing other than that. if government could be held to a standard of behavior which is demonstrably logical, all those problems may disappear either from alternatives being provided or through the inalienable right of government necessary for the good of it's willing subjects. (Advocate@HavenBastion.org)

Topic

In its current form, this article doesn't address its supposed topic in any way. The social contract is a concept from political philosophy, it's used to determine whether or not a government or social order in general legitimately inhibits the natural freedom of its citizens. It's a 17th century concept that doesn't have anything to do with Plato and Epicurus, and it's certainly not an ethical doctrine or system in the vein of deontology. So I'm going to rewrite this pretty much from scratch, just wanted to bring it up first. Röstigraben (talk) 08:45, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm no student of philosophy by any stretch of the imagination, but the introduction to my copy of Crito does call this an early incarnation of the social contract theory. Junggai (talk) 09:29, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Not so fast. I have always understood that what Plato described in Crito and perhaps more famously by his character Glaucon in Republic describes the concept that is later called social contract. I think the early stuff should stay. --Damo^Hi 10:12, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

The quoted passage does contain thinking that's similar to the modern contract theorists, but that doesn't mean that Plato is the one who came up with the idea or supplied important precepts. The key issue is legitimacy, and Plato's republicanism envisions a role of the state and justification for it that's not at all similar to what Hobbes, Locke and the others came up with. Plato's perfect republic is a utopian place, all about wise rulers governing an enlightened body politic, delivering justice and the common good. The modern contractualists take a completely different angle and start out with different anthropologies and conceptions of natural rights, then go on to develop rationalist arguments for the creation and the limits of state power. Maybe it could still be brought up in a short paragraph as something remotely similar, but it's not a very good way to start the article off. Anyway, that's a minor issue - more importantly, the intro is outright false, it downplays the status of Enlightenment philosophers (which were extremely important here), and it keeps circling the issue of morality, which is completely tangential to this line of thought. Röstigraben (talk) 10:28, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Social contracts and popular revolution

To what extent does a popular revolution/general uprising mean that 'the populace' withdraws from the social contract? 212.85.6.26 (talk) 16:26, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Depends what they do. If the Egyptians, instead of demonstrating peacefully in Tahrir Square, had stormed the presidential palace and thrown Mubarak from its roof, that would have been a much greater withdrawal from the contract than what they actually did. Most protesters would probably see themselves, however, as trying to restore a social contract that their rulers have reneged on. Real first name and last initial^{Talk, talk, talk skim my contributions} 19:25, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Some of the transitions in the recent past can be seen as at least a partial withdrawal of the populace from the social contract - there is an admixture of other aspects (including power changes at the top). Possible examples - Hungary 1956, 'Nicholae Ceausescu and the crowd' 1989 - the moment when he realises he has lost authority - and some of the processes of decolonisation. Shall we say that there is something in the concept, but it needs teasing out by various people? 212.85.6.26 (talk) 17:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)