The Social Contract in the Ruins: Natural Law and Government by Consent

Scholars studying the relationship between natural moral law and social contract theory argue that the principles of these theories are in conflict and unreconcilable. Paul DeHart argues that natural moral law and social contract theory are logically and metaphysically compatible, and that the principle of consent in the social contract depends on classical natural law for its intelligibility. The Declaration of Independence states that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, and that the relationship between government and the governed is a rational enterprise constructed by individuals. DeHart asserts that any intelligible account of the claim that consent forms a necessary condition for political authority and obligation depends on a morally and metaphysically realist account of natural law, which contradicts modernist metaphysics and ethics.

Format: Hardback
Length: 440 pages
Publication date: 30 June 2024
Publisher: University of Missouri Press

Scholars who delve into the relationship between natural moral law and social contract theory often perceive these theories as conflicting and irreconcilable. For instance, if natural law establishes the framework for political governance, then the consent of the governed becomes unnecessary. Conversely, social contract theory necessitates the implicit consent of the governed to establish and justify a government's legitimacy. In his recent work, Paul DeHart contends that natural moral law and social contract theory are logically and metaphysically compatible, and that the principle of consent embodied in the social contract relies on classical natural law for its very intelligibility.

According to the Declaration of Independence, governments acquire their just powers from the consent of the governed. This statement embodies the theoretical commitment of Revolutionary Era Americans to government based on a social contract. They rejected traditional metaphysical and philosophical grounds of political authority founded in natural law, such as divine right, natural subordination, and the right of the wise and good to exercise political rule over a benighted citizenry. Instead, they inferred the necessity of consent from the fundamental equality of individuals and maintained that the relationship of government to the governed is not given by nature but is a rational enterprise constructed by individuals.

In short, the relationship between classical philosophy, its account of fundamental reality, ethics, and its view of humans, and the social contract theory of the early moderns has been viewed as one of essential conflict rather than one of compatibility or essential connection.

In his book, The Social Contract in the Ruins, DeHart asserts that any intelligible account of the claim that the social contract depends upon natural moral law must address the following questions: How does natural moral law provide the necessary conditions for the possibility of a social contract? How does natural moral law ground the moral obligation to enter into a social contract? How does natural moral law determine the content and scope of the social contract? How does natural moral law provide the foundation for the legitimacy of the social contract?

DeHart argues that natural moral law provides the necessary conditions for the possibility of a social contract. He contends that natural moral law establishes the fundamental principles of right and wrong, which form the basis for moral reasoning and decision-making. Without these principles, there would be no basis for establishing a social contract, as individuals would not have a common understanding of what is right and wrong.

Furthermore, DeHart argues that natural moral law grounds the moral obligation to enter into a social contract. He maintains that individuals have a moral obligation to cooperate with others for the common good and to respect the rights of others. This obligation arises from the inherent value of human beings and their inherent capacity for rationality and moral judgment.

Moreover, DeHart argues that natural moral law determines the content and scope of the social contract. He suggests that natural moral law provides the principles that govern the formation and implementation of laws, regulations, and social institutions. These principles include the principles of justice, equality, and freedom, which are essential for the establishment of a just and peaceful society.

Finally, DeHart argues that natural moral law provides the foundation for the legitimacy of the social contract. He maintains that the social contract is a rational agreement between individuals to establish a government that will protect their rights and promote their common good. The legitimacy of the social contract is grounded in the moral obligation of individuals to obey the laws and regulations established by the government and to cooperate with others for the common good.

In conclusion, DeHart's work challenges the traditional view that natural moral law and social contract theory are inherently conflicting. He argues that natural moral law provides the necessary conditions for the possibility of a social contract, grounds the moral obligation to enter into a social contract, determines the content and scope of the social contract, and provides the foundation for the legitimacy of the social contract. By integrating natural moral law into the social contract theory, DeHart offers a more comprehensive and coherent account of political authority.

Weight: 454g
Dimension: 229 x 152 (mm)
ISBN-13: 9780826223050