Talk:Social Contract (Rousseau)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details. | ||||||||
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. | ||||||||
|
|||||||||
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate, you can edit the article. You can discuss the Project at its talk page. |
| B | This article has been rated as B-Class on the Project's quality scale. (If you rated the article please give a short summary at in the comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
Im not quite an expert, but I believe that Hobbes's social contract was between the people in order to create a sovereign(government). In other words, the sovereign is not a party to this covenant therefore it would be inacccurate to describe his contract as "between the people and their government"
That's correct... quoting from Hobbes's Leviathan:
"It is a real unity of them all, in one and the same person, made by covenant of every man with every man, in such a manner as if every man should say to every man, I authorize and give up my right of governing myself, to this man, or to this assembly of men, on this condition, that thou give up thy right to him, and authorize all his actions in a like manner."
Rousseau may not have a particularly detailed plan for how the Sovereign (i.e. the people) should enact legislation, but he does strongly advocate popular assembly, as in classical antiquity.
[edit] Enactment
"Rousseau may not have a particularly detailed plan for how the Sovereign (i.e. the people) should enact legislation, but he does strongly advocate popular assembly, as in classical antiquity."
That is wrong. Legislation should be, and must be, enacteed by government. It is very clear in that manner. The form of which the government takes and the derivation of such a government is what Rousseau is not clear on. This obscurity only proves that there is more than one way and Rousseau did not want to pretend he had the answer.
Just becareful on how you phrase things. Although he didn't directly explain how assemblies should form, he did praise the Roman system (Book IV, Chapter IV). Again, what he was clear on is that the government 'enacts' legislation, ie applies the law.
