100%(3)3 out of 3 people found this document helpful
This preview shows page 1 - 3 out of 3 pages.
the individual. Even though they are both major contributors to the social contract theory, their views vary and differentiate in many ways.John Locke believed that individuals in a state of nature would be bound morally, this would usually not make them harm each other, but without a government to protect them from those willing to break the moral code, they would have no sense of security and would live in constant fear. At the same time Locke also stated “that all government in the world is merely the product of force and violence, and that men live together by no other rules than that of the beasts, where the strongest carries it...”(Uzgalis) and this belief was the basis for his educated view and explanation of the social contract. Even though John Locke believed in this, in some way it would also mean that he would be negating a very central distinction between legitimate and illegitimate government. He believed that legitimate government could come through violence as
long as the people being governed give consent. John Locke’s view of government was that its legitimacy is derived from “just powers from the consent of the governed” (Friend). Jean-Jacques Rousseau has two different social contract theories. The first one explains the political and moral progression of human beings over time, from a young state of nature to a modern society (Friend). He believes this one to be problematic, because it has a naturalized