The social contract theory allows individuals to coexist in society, on the basis of a mutual agreement which limits rational persons 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 this theory, without these contracts, society would be in a state of nature, or "prima materia", a primordial chaotic nature where no moral rules exist. In Elements of Moral Philosophy, Rachels states that morality is a set of principles that influence behavior and that would be considered acceptable by rational people. Based on a mutual agreement requirement. Social contracts provide valuable infrastructure for symbiotic coexistence and balance in society, regardless of implicit or explicit categorizations. These contracts differ in the validation method. An example of an implicit social contract is that one will not act violently and will give appropriate respect to elders. While another is explicitly stated, such as speed limit laws, which are aimed at the rational licensed driver who agrees to be governed by; the moral and social boundaries and restrictions outlined in the DMV guidelines, as well as implicit within the social contract. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why violent video games should not be banned"?Get the original essay In his theory of justice, John Rawls argues that his social contract theory can be considered part of the contract tradition social, which includes Hobbs, Mill, and Kant. It happens to be one of the oldest philosophies. However, social contract theory is actually 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 An example of limiting this outdated philosophy is that which hides self-defeating contracts, which impose limits on people based on their social class. The purpose of this essay is to determine the moral imperatives that define a tradition such as the social contract and to evaluate the assertions of Hobbes and Rawls, 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 imperatives given as a natural and replicable model of contract to clarify some of the controversial points of Rawls and Hobbs' political theory, and how it relates to and differs from Kantian deontology and utilitarianism. originally published the social contract as a legal theory, written in Leviathan, as the premise of the moral obligation of political conduct. Similar to Rawls, Hobbes agrees that before the social contract, man lived in the state of nature, ignoring morality. Man's life in chaotic nature was one of fear and selfishness, that of a post-apocalyptic world. The man lived in a chaotic state of constant fear. In fear of being killed or losing what he holds dear, man has often had to live a life of solidarity, in brutal and short-lived conditions. In contrast, without security, self-protection and self-preservation become a survival instinct to avoid misery and pain. For man to evolve into civil communities, rational people abdicated all their rights andfreedoms for the benefit of an objective intermediary authority, which governs obedience. As a result of these contracts, the greatest power is that of ensuring the preservation of lives and property. One of the flaws of this categorical imperative is that of absolute rulers, where subjects have no rights and must obey in all situations, regardless of the circumstances. circumstance. In this particular perspective of monarchist rules, Hobbes' theory is that moral obligations are bound by natural law. So that if the institutional government abuses its position of power, its power will be overthrown. According to the rules of Hobbes, other sanctioned powers, words will have no force without swords. He emphasized that civil law is real because it is commanded and enforced by sovereign rulers, and that if it were simply hearsay it would fail to maintain order. Thus, one of the principles most defended by Hobbes is that of “might is always right”. Contrary to Hobbes's absolutist position, the incessant enforcement of self-destructive contracts or unjust interests that might otherwise find their way into political affairs can lead to disadvantages. Like Rawls, Hobbes suggests the mechanistic theory of human nature and states that it is necessary to be exclusively self-interested. This is to say that one will only follow what they perceive to be in their own individual interest. Altruistically, as part of the social contract, one does not sacrifice the best interests of others as a means to achieve ends that serve one's best interests. Such a case would lead to a self-defeating moral imperative, on the basis that breaking the social contract can trigger a degrading effect of loss of confidence in the ability of other rational parties to the agreement to uphold their contractual obligations. Implicit from the above statement, Hobbes asserts that rational people have the ability to pursue their desires as effectively and as much as possible, as a premise for fulfilling their contract. This would inevitably lead to them being their best selves, which would realize the greatest potential value to society. One of the constructions of Hobbes' thought is an argument based on "prima materia", imagining society before the establishment of said agreements, and agreements, where he prescribes subjects to fully surrender to sovereign power in order to to preserve the peace, life and prosperity of the subjects. This is how Hobbes uses natural law as a means of assigning hierarchy on the basis of mutually assured destruction. This is because a ruler must strive to maintain peace and the welfare and rights of his subjects. Otherwise, the balance of existing natural laws will come into effect and lead to the demise of evil rulers, who continue to rule from a subject mindset rather than being a moral guide assigned by a sovereign who lives to serve the people. This line of thought is a clear demonstration of Hobbes's advocacy of established order and the desire to help one another or unite 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 principles of morality are chosen by free, rational, equal, and self-interested individuals, within a particular, defined context that he calls the "Original Position." Agreement is a hypothetical construct, which a majority of rational individuals prefer as a principle of justice or fairness in well-defined circumstances..