The exposition of the philosophies of the said great thinkers, will serve as the foundation in answering the central point of the paper, which is to enlighten the readers the implications of these philosophies in the public education. This principle developed from a dominant school of thought of the seventeenth century and eighteenth century called rationalism.
References and Further Reading 1. Socrates' Argument In the early Platonic dialogue, Crito, Socrates makes a compelling argument as to why he must stay in prison and accept the death penalty, rather than escape and go into exile in another Greek city.
He personifies the Laws of Athens, and, speaking in their voice, explains that he has acquired an overwhelming obligation to obey the Laws because they have made his entire way of life, and even the fact of his very existence, possible.
They made it possible for his mother and father to marry, and therefore to have legitimate children, including himself. Having been born, the city of Athens, through its laws, then required that his father care for and educate him. Socrates' life and the way in which that life has flourished in Athens are each dependent upon the Laws.
Importantly, however, this relationship between citizens and the Laws of the city are not coerced. Citizens, once they have grown up, and have seen how the city conducts itself, can choose whether to leave, taking their property with them, or stay.
Staying implies an agreement to abide by the Laws and accept the punishments that they mete out. And, having made an agreement that is itself just, Socrates asserts that he must keep to this agreement that he has made and obey the Laws, in this case, by staying and accepting the death penalty.
Importantly, the contract described by Socrates is an implicit one: In Plato's most well-known dialogue, Republic, social contract theory is represented again, although this time less favorably. In Book II, Glaucon offers a candidate for an answer to the question "what is justice?
What men would most want is to be able to commit injustices against others without the fear of reprisal, and what they most want to avoid is being treated unjustly by others without being able to do injustice in return. Justice then, he says, is the conventional result of the laws and covenants that men make in order to avoid these extremes.
Being unable to commit injustice with impunity as those who wear the ring of Gyges wouldand fearing becoming victims themselves, men decide that it is in their interests to submit themselves to the convention of justice. Socrates rejects this view, and most of the rest of the dialogue centers on showing that justice is worth having for its own sake, and that the just man is the happy man.
These views, in the Crito and the Republic, might seem at first glance inconsistent: These two views are, however, reconcilable.
From Socrates' point of view, a just man is one who will, among other things, recognize his obligation to the state by obeying its laws. The state is the morally and politically most fundamental entity, and as such deserves our highest allegiance and deepest respect.
Just men know this and act accordingly. Justice, however, is more than simply obeying laws in exchange for others obeying them as well. Justice is the state of a well-regulated soul, and so the just man will also necessarily be the happy man.
So, justice is more than the simple reciprocal obedience to law, as Glaucon suggests, but it does nonetheless include obedience to the state and the laws that sustain it. So in the end, although Plato is perhaps the first philosopher to offer a representation of the argument at the heart of social contract theory, Socrates ultimately rejects the idea that social contract is the original source of justice.
Modern Social Contract Theory a. Thomas Hobbes Thomas Hobbes, lived during the most crucial period of early modern England's history: To describe this conflict in the most general of terms, it was a clash between the King and his supporters, the Monarchists, who preferred the traditional authority of a monarch, and the Parliamentarians, most notably led by Oliver Cromwell, who demanded more power for the quasi-democratic institution of Parliament.
Hobbes represents a compromise between these two factions. On the one hand he rejects the theory of the Divine Right of Kings, which is most eloquently expressed by Robert Filmer in his Patriarcha or the Natural Power of Kings, although it would be left to John Locke to refute Filmer directly.
According to this view, then, political obligation is subsumed under religious obligation. On the other hand, Hobbes also rejects the early democratic view, taken up by the Parliamentarians, that power ought to be shared between Parliament and the King.
In rejecting both these views, Hobbes occupies the ground of one who is both radical and conservative. He argues, radically for his times, that political authority and obligation are based on the individual self-interests of members of society who are understood to be equal to one another, with no single individual invested with any essential authority to rule over the rest, while at the same time maintaining the conservative position that the monarch, which he called the Sovereign, must be ceded absolute authority if society is to survive.
Hobbes' political theory is best understood if taken in two parts: Hobbes has, first and foremost, a particular theory of human nature, which gives rise to a particular view of morality and politics, as developed in his philosophical masterpiece, Leviathan, published in The Scientific Revolution, with its important new discoveries that the universe could be both described and predicted in accordance with universal laws of nature, greatly influenced Hobbes.
He sought to provide a theory of human nature that would parallel the discoveries being made in the sciences of the inanimate universe. His psychological theory is therefore informed by mechanism, the general view that everything in the universe is produced by nothing other than matter in motion.
According to Hobbes, this extends to human behavior. Human macro-behavior can be aptly described as the effect of certain kinds of micro-behavior, even though some of this latter behavior is invisible to us.
So, such behaviors as walking, talking, and the like are themselves produced by other actions inside of us. And these other actions are themselves caused by the interaction of our bodies with other bodies, human or otherwise, which create in us certain chains of causes and effects, and which eventually give rise to the human behavior that we can plainly observe.
We, including all of our actions and choices, are then, according to this view, as explainable in terms of universal laws of nature as are the motions of heavenly bodies.What are the similarities between Locke’s and Hobbes’ ideas of property? How do the Social Contract theories of Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau differ?
What are the ideas of Thomas Hobbes and John Locke? How do Hobbes and Locke differ?
Hobbes and Locke: Comparing and Contrasting Political Philosophies Words 7 Pages (A) Comparing and contrasting the political philosophies of . This study of Hobbes, Locke, Montesquieu, and Rousseau is designed to give students an understanding of the ideas of these four philosophers and is also an opportunity for them to reflect on humanity’s need for order and efforts to create stability within the social community.
Thomas Hobbes was born on April 5, His father, an Anglican clergyman, left the family when Thomas was still young. John Locke () John Locke is sometimes called “the father of the enlightenment.” He was born August 29, , the same year as Spinoza.
His father was an attorney and a Puritan, who taught young John the value. John Locke quote God Given Rights John Locke quote Equal and Independent John Locke quote Life, Liberty, and John Locke vs.
Thomas Jefferson Chloe Moino 6th Thomas Jefferson quote Overrule the Government Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States, and John Locke, a philosopher, both had influences on how America's government works today.
Two prime examples of differences verses similarities in political philosophers is Thomas Hobbes and John Locke.. Thomas Hobbes lived from ; he resided in England during the reign of Henry VII, who was a monarch, followed by Elizabeth I and James (VI) I.