Outline
1. The state of nature
2. The definition of the state
3. Justifying the state : social contract and utilitarian theory
4. "I hate State" Amarchism
State of nature
1. State without government and laws
2. Only raw human nature
3. The starting point on political philosophy
What happen in the state of nature?
Thomas Hobbes
❤Nature is scarce
❤Humans are selfish
❤Leads to competition and conflict
No arts, no letters : no society and which is worse of all, continual fear and danger of violent and death and the life of man solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.
Scarcity
Natural resources are finite. Not everyone can have them. Human needs resources to survive.
Selfishness
Human pursue their own individual interest : survival.
Scarcity means means some interest may clash
Competition happens.
Competition
The main driver of competition is fear.
Humans are afraid that others will screw them over. So, they use any means to fulfill their interest.
Lack of institution means no moral boundaries.
John Locke
John Locke (picture source : google.com)
❤In nature, we are equal and free
❤Law of nature is preservation of humanity
Consent : I give the state of my freedoms, the state then guarantees my safety.
Social contract theory
How does the contract work?
1. The state has absolute control over public domain such as defense, finance and economic
2. The people are free to enjoy their freedoms in private domain such as freedom of speech, freedom of faith etc.
Voluntary Consent
1. Without consent the social contract loses power and the state cannot be justified.
2. Physical proof consent?
Example : voting, citizenship, pledge of allegiance
Tacit Consent
1. By living and enjoying benefits in the state, you tacitly consent to social contract.
2. If you don't like, you can leave. Problematic?
Some problems with consent
1. If we are forced to vote, how it can be called consent?
2. If the only choice is leaving the state. How do we know that people staying are consent?
3. If we cannot solve this, social contact theory may be wrong.
Utilitarian Theory
Basic Utilitarian Theory
1. All of actions are to achieve the highest level of happiness.
2. Since we are free people can do anything that increases our happiness
Jeremy Bentham
Jeremy Bentham (picture source : google.com)
Subject should obey King, so long as the probable, mischiefs of obedience are less than the probable miscchiefs of resistence.
It makes more sense, but
1. Utilitarian theory seems to make more sense because there's no consent to prove.
2. But, what if the state tries to increase happiness in morally unacceptable ways?
Political Obligation
Since I joined the state, I have to contribute to the state.
Summary so far...
1. There are two theories that try to explain why you have political obligations : social contract and utilitarian theory
2. Because you consent, you have political obligation
3. I am obligated to follow the state because it brings more happiness than other opttions.
I hate the States
Arguing against the state
1. It is impossible to prove everyone has political oblgations
2. The states forces me to obey : it is legitimate because it violates my freedom as human.
3. I haven't consented and I won't to consent to the state.
Humans are inherently good
1. Anarchists believe humans are cooperative and don't need the state.
2. Even if there are laws,you should not obey them unless they are aligned with your own moral judgements
Attractive but unsustainable
1. In small doses, Anarchism works. Small self- sustained communities are exmples.
2. However, in long term, this does not allow for further development.
Conclusion
1. The state exists because we want to escape the state of nature
2. We have political obligations to the state, which either come from consent or utilitarian thinkiing. However, whether there obligations keep us bound to the state is another question.
Komentar
Posting Komentar