Social contract theory states that people live together in society, based on an agreement that establishes moral and political rules of conduct. Some philosophers, such as Hobbs and Rawls, believe that we live morally according to these social contracts chosen by society, rather than according to a contract chosen by a divine being. According to the theory, without such contracts, society would be in a state of nature, or “prima materia,” a chaotic primary nature where no moral rules exist. In Elements of Moral Philosophy, Rachels states that morality is a set of principles that imitate behavior that would be considered acceptable by rational people, based on mutual agreement. Social contracts provide a valuable framework for harmony and balance in society, regardless of implicit or explicit categorizations. Such contracts differ in the method of validation. An example of an implicit social contract is that one will not act violently and will give due respect to elders. While another is explicitly stated, these laws, namely the raising of the hand to ask permission to leave the classroom, which is aimed at the rational student who chooses to go to school and agrees to be governed by moral limits and restrictions and social issues that are outlined in the school guidelines, as well as implicit as a social contract. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay In his A Theory of Justice, John Rawls states that his social contract theory can be considered part of the social contract tradition, which includes Hobbs, Mill, and Kant. This appears to be one of the oldest philosophies. However, social contract theory is actually that of modern moral and political theory. In particular, many race-conscious feminists and philosophers have argued that the social contract is at least an incomplete picture of the moral and political life of society. An example of an outdated philosophy is one that hides self-destructive contracts, which place limits on people based on class. The purpose of this essay is to determine the moral imperatives that define a tradition such as that of the social contract and to evaluate that of Hobbes, and Rawls's claims, and regarding the use of limitations versus qualifications as methods of defining categorical imperatives or guidelines for ethics and conduct. At the same time, I will analyze the general nature of the contract model to clarify some of the controversial points in Rawls and Hobbs' political theory, and how it relates to and differs from Kantian deontology and utilitarianism. Thomas Hobbes' social contract theory was first written in Leviathan which was published in 1651 during the civil war in Britain. Thomas Hobbes initially wrote it as a legal theory based on the “social contract”. Similar to Rawls, Hobbes agrees that before the social contract man lived in the state of nature, ignorant of morality. Man's life in primary chaotic nature was one of fear and selfishness, that of a post-apocalyptic world. Man lived in a chaotic condition of constant fear. In fear of being killed or losing what you hold dear, man has often been left to live a life of solidarity, in brutal and short-lived conditions. Conversely, without security, one's self-protection and self-preservation becomes a survival instinct to avoid misery and pain. In order for man to evolve into a civil community, rational people have abdicated all their rights and freedoms to an intermediate objective authority, which regulates their obedience. As a result of these contracts, the greater power isthat of ensuring the preservation of human lives and property. A deficiency of this categorical imperative is that of absolute rulers, where subjects have no rights and must obey in all situations, regardless of circumstance. In this particular perspective of monarchical rules, Hobbes' theory holds that moral obligations are bound by natural law. Like, that if the institutional government were to abuse their position of power, their government will be overthrown. According to Hobbes' rules, other sanctioned powers, words will have no strength without swords. He emphasized that civil law is real because it is commanded and enforced by sovereign rulers, and if it were only hearsay then it would fail to maintain order. Therefore, one of the principles most supported by Hobbes is that “Might is always right”. Contrary to Hobbes's absolutist position, there may be downsides to the incessant enforcement of self-defeating contracts or unjust interests that might otherwise be vested in political affairs. Similar to Rawls, Hobbes suggests the mechanistic theory of human nature, stating that it is necessary to be exclusively selfish. This is to say that you will only follow what you perceive to be in your individual best interest. Selflessly, within the guidelines of the social contract, one does not sacrifice the best interests of others as a means to achieve the ends of one's own best self-interest. Such a case will lead to a self-defeating moral imperative, on the grounds that if one breaks the social contract one may begin a degrading effect of loss of faith in the ability of the other rational parties to the agreement to maintain their contractual duties. Implicitly of the above statement, Hobbes states that rational people have the ability to pursue their desires as efficiently and as possible, as a premise for fulfilling the contract of being the best oneself, to be able to provide the best value for society. One of the constructs of Hobbes's thought is an argument based on “prima materia,” imagining society before the conclusion of said agreements, and agreements, in which he prescribes subjects to surrender completely to the sovereign government to preserve peace, life and prosperity of the subjects. It is in this way that Hobbes uses natural law as a means of assigning hierarchy on the basis of mutually assured destruction. This is because a ruler should strive to maintain the peace, well-being and rights of his subjects. Otherwise, the balance of existing natural laws will take effect and lead to the end of perverse rulers, who continue to rule from a subjective state of mind rather than being a moral guide assigned to the ruler who lives to serve the people. This line of thought is a clear demonstration of Hobbes's advocacy for an established order and the desire to help each other or unite with each other against a common enemy. In order to mitigate moral imperatives and allow them the flexibility of universal application, individualism, materialism, utilitarianism, and absolutions are all aspects of Hobbes' social contract theory. Rawls believes that his moral principles are chosen by free, rational, equal and selfish individuals, within a particularized and defined context that he calls the "Original Position". Agreement is a hypothetical construct, which most rational individuals prefer as principles of justice or fairness in adequately defined circumstances. These circumstances are generally empirical and cultural facts and relevant to moral intuition within an awareness of individuality, separate from prestige or.