Overview: Write A 23-Page Essay On A Selected Issue ✓ Solved

Overviewwrite A 23 Page Essay On A Selected Issue Related To The Tens

Overviewwrite A 23 Page Essay On A Selected Issue Related To The Tens

Write a 2–3-page essay on a selected issue related to the tension between individual freedom and social institutions. Discuss the ethical basis for the relationship between individuals and their government, describe social contract theories of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau, and assess the strengths and weaknesses of these theories in justifying authority. Apply these theories to your chosen contemporary issue, and develop your own position on the proper relation between society and the individual. Communicate your ideas clearly and professionally, following scholarly standards.

Sample Paper For Above instruction

Introduction

The tension between individual freedom and social institutions has been a longstanding concern in political philosophy. Understanding how societal organization and government authority can coexist with personal liberty involves examining foundational theories such as those proposed by Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau. This essay explores these social contract theories, assesses their strengths and weaknesses, and applies them to a contemporary issue—namely, government surveillance versus personal privacy. Finally, it articulates a personal stance on the extent of individual freedom permissible under legitimate authority.

Ethical Basis for the Relationship between Individuals and Government

The ethical foundation of the relation between individuals and their governments revolves around the concepts of justice, consent, and the social contract. Theories of social contract suggest that individuals consent, explicitly or implicitly, to surrender some freedoms in exchange for security, order, and protection of rights. This compromise forms the basis for legitimate authority, which must serve the common good while respecting individual rights (Dworkin, 2013). Philosophers like Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau interpret this relationship through different lenses, shaping modern debates about the limits of government power and personal liberty.

Theories of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau

Thomas Hobbes, in his work Leviathan (1651), posited that in a state of nature, humans are driven by selfishness and fear, leading to a constant state of war. To escape this chaos, individuals enter into a social contract, surrendering absolute freedom to a sovereign who maintains order (Cudd & Eftekhari, 2017). Hobbes believed that this authority needed to be absolute for stability.

John Locke viewed the social contract differently. In Two Treatises of Government (1689), Locke argued that in natural state, individuals have equal rights to life, liberty, and property. They voluntarily consent to form governments to protect these rights, with the legitimacy of authority contingent upon protecting natural rights and serving the will of the governed (Moseley, n.d.).

Rousseau’s view, presented in The Social Contract (1762), emphasizes voluntary association and collective will. Rousseau believed that humans are born free and that any social contract must express the "general will"—the collective interest that sustains true freedom (Wraight, 2008). Unlike Hobbes’ authoritarian sovereign or Locke’s limited government, Rousseau advocates for direct participation and the integration of individual liberty within the collective:

“Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains.” (Rousseau, 1762)

Assessment of Theories: Strengths and Weaknesses

Hobbes’ theory provides stability and order, emphasizing security as a priority. However, it risks justifying authoritarian rule and suppressing individual rights beyond what is necessary. Locke’s theory advocates for limited government and individual rights, making it influential in liberal democracies, but it assumes rational consent and neglects power imbalances that can distort consent (Kemerling, 2011).

Rousseau’s collective emphasis supports direct democracy and social cohesion, but its idealism may overlook practical challenges in achieving true collective will. It also raises concerns about potential tyranny of the majority, where individual freedoms could be sacrificed for perceived collective goals (Bertram, 2010).

Application to Contemporary Issue: Government Surveillance and Personal Privacy

The debates around government surveillance exemplify these theories. Hobbes’ approach would justify extensive surveillance as protecting social order, even at the expense of privacy. Locke’s perspective would insist that surveillance must be limited and rooted in the consent of individuals, carefully balancing security and privacy (Lloyd & Sreedhar, 2018). Rousseau might argue that such measures should reflect the collective will and serve the common good, but with safeguards to prevent tyranny.

Applying Locke’s social contract, the legitimacy of government surveillance hinges on transparent policies, accountability, and safeguarding individual rights. Excessive or secret surveillance could breach the social contract, violating individuals’ autonomy and trust. Conversely, a well-justified surveillance regime, with consent and oversight, aligns with Locke’s framework.

My Position on Freedom and Authority

I believe that individual freedom must be respected within the boundaries of social responsibility. Governments should employ surveillance and other social controls only when necessary, proportionate, and under clear legal frameworks that ensure accountability. Locke’s emphasis on consent and individual rights offers a balanced approach, promoting freedom while acknowledging the need for social order (Tuckness, 2016). Rousseau’s ideas remind us that collective well-being is vital, yet they must be tempered to protect minority rights.

Conclusion

The social contract theories of Hobbes, Locke, and Rousseau offer vital insights into the relationship between individual freedom and social authority. Their strengths and weaknesses inform ongoing debates about the limits of state power, especially in contemporary issues like surveillance. My own view aligns with Locke’s perspective, advocating for a careful, transparent balance that foregrounds individual rights within a framework of legitimate authority.

References

  • Bertram, C. (2010, September 27). Jean Jacques Rousseau. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rousseau/
  • Cudd, A., & Eftekhari, S. (2017). Contractarianism. Stanfield Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Dworkin, R. (2013). Justice for Hedgehogs. Harvard University Press.
  • Kemerling, G. (2011). Hobbes's Leviathan. The Philosophy Pages.
  • Lloyd, S. A., & Sreedhar, S. (2018). Hobbes's moral and political philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Moseley, A. (n.d.). John Locke: Political Philosophy. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Rousseau, J.-J. (1762). The Social Contract. Retrieved from https:// plato.stanford.edu/entries/rousseau/
  • Tuckness, A. (2016). Locke's political philosophy. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  • Wraight, C. D. (2008). Rousseau's The Social Contract: A Reader's Guide. London: Continuum.

Related Assignments