Social Contract Theory

The idea behind social contract theory is fairly simple. The theory suggests that we have things such as moral code and ethics because of the societies we live in. This helps explain why moral values can be different in different cultures (a fact that is not as easily explained by other theories). The idea is that humans living in a society that is just forming all must figuratively sign a contract to live in that society. They decide to give up certain liberties (such as the ability to kill someone else) for rights and protection (such as the right not to be killed). Social contract theory suggests that without a society, there would be no moral code.

While I am not sure everyone would agree that it is a strict proponent of social contract theory, there is another idea pertaining to it. The idea that some sort of central governing body is required to uphold the contract. Whether it be an elected body, a dictator, or a village elder, as long as it is a body that commands respect and upholds the contract. If you did not have such a body, some would argue that it would be impossible the know if anyone else will uphold the contract, and therefore you have no reason to do so yourself.

I think it is possible to have some belief in the social contract theory without any kind of governing body. I am in college, and last year I had 5 roommates whom I had previously never met before. Suppose that I somehow knew that I could steal or break their belongings, and nobody would find out. No governing body to worry about at all, because I was guaranteed not to be caught. I could take this guy's food, or blow out this other person's speakers because he has his bass turned up too loud at night sometimes. Why wouldn't I do those things?

In this case there is no reason for me to be afraid of any governing body. Yet I am reluctant to steal from my roommates. Assuming it is not because I am some sort of moral saint, (another topic of discussion entirely) there is good reason for me not to steal. The idea is that there seem to be certain lines set up, and once you cross that line, the whole society or group you are living in changes. If I stole from a roommate, that may open the door for stealing among us. So if I did steal, that would in theory increase the chances of being the victim of theft myself. If you believe this to be the case, then there must have been some kind of unwritten contract among myself and my roommates. Something along the lines of "By living here, I accept the responsibility of treating your property with respect." I think most of us would agree that that is a contract most of us live by, and it is the simple act of living together, not the fear of being arrested for theft, that keeps us from stealing from each other.

Hollywood gives us a good example. In a scene many of us have seen too many times to count, several men all have guns pointing at one another, but nobody is shooting. There is plenty of yelling and dialog, but no shooting. However, once the first man pulls the trigger, everything goes to hell and everyone starts shooting. That first man crossed the line, and in this case it can probably be assumed that the only authority these men currently fear is the other man's gun. Whether these instances actually occur in real life is something I have wondered for years, but it is a pretty good example of social contract theory as I see it.

To be continued.