Social contract theory allows people to live together in society, based on a mutual agreement that limits rational people to moral and political standards. 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 in which no moral rules exist. In Elements of Moral Philosophy, Rachels states that morality is a set of principles that influence behavior, which would be seen as acceptable by rational people. Based on a mutual agreement requirement. Social contracts provide a valuable infrastructure for symbiotic coexistence 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, such as the law on speed limits, which is aimed at the rational driver who agrees to be regulated; the moral and social limits and restrictions outlined in the DMV guidelines, as well as implied as part of the 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, the social contract theory is actually the one of great importance in contemporary 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 a limitation of this antiquated philosophy is that it 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 the claims of Hobbes and Rawls, and regarding the use of limits with respect to qualifications, as methods of defining categorical imperatives or lines guide to ethics and conduct. At the same time, I will analyze given imperatives as a natural and reproducible model of the contract to clarify some of the controversial points in the political theory of Rawls and Hobbs, and how it relates to and differs from Kantian deontology and utilitarianism.Thomas Hobbes' initially published the contract social as a legal theory, written in Leviathan, as a premise for the moral obligation of political conduct. 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 greatest power is to oversee the preservation ofhuman 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 is that moral obligations are bound by natural law. Such 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 in this statement, Hobbes argues that rational people have the ability to pursue their desires in the most efficient and possible way, as a premise for the fulfillment of the contract. This would inevitably lead to giving the best of oneself, realizing the maximum potential 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, where 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 superiority. In other words, the.