Who was the author of "The Social Contract"? ?->(Show Answer!)

1. Who was the author of "The Social Contract"?

Answer: Rousseau

Reply

Comments

Tags

Show Similar Question And Answers

QA->Who is the author of the book "Le Contract Social (The Social Contract)" ?....

QA->Who is the author of The Social Contract ?....

QA->Who was the author of "The Social Contract"?....

QA->Who is the author of “Social Contract”?....

QA->Who is the author of “(The Social Contract) Leaves of Grass”?....

MCQ-> My aim is to present a conception of justice which generalizes and carries to a higher level of abstraction the familiar theory of the social contract. In order to do this we are not to think of the original contract as one to enter a particular society or to set up a particular form of government. Rather, the idea is that the principles of justice for the basic structure of society are the object of the original agreement. They are the principles that free and rational persons concerned to further their own interests would accept in an initial position of equality. These principles are to regulate all further agreements; they specify the kinds of social cooperation that can be entered into and the forms of government that can be established. This way of regarding the principles of justice, I shall call justice as fairness. Thus, we are to imagine that those who engage in social cooperation choose together, in one joint act, the principles which are to assign basic rights and duties and to determine the division of social benefits. Just as each person must decide by rational reflection what constitutes his good, that is, the system of ends which it is rational for him to pursue, so a group of persons must decide once and for all what is to count among them as just and unjust. The choice which rational men would make in this hypothetical situation of equal liberty determines the principles of justice.In ‘justice as fairness’, the original position is not an actual historical state of affairs. It is understood as a purely hypothetical situation characterized so as to lead to a certain conception of justice. Among the essential features of this situation is that no one knows his place in society, his class position or social status, nor does anyone know his fortune in the distribution of natural assets and abilities, his intelligence, strength, and the like. I shall even assume that the parties do not know their conceptions of the good or their special psychological propensities. The principles of justice are chosen behind a veil of ignorance. This ensures that no one is advantaged or disadvantaged in the choice of principles by the outcome of natural chance or the contingency of social circumstances. Since all are similarly situated and no one is able to design principles to favor his particular condition, the principles of justice are the result of a fair agreement or bargain.Justice as fairness begins with one of the most general of all choices which persons might make together, namely, with the choice of the first principles of a conception of justice which is to regulate all subsequent criticism and reform of institutions. Then, having chosen a conception of justice, we can suppose that they are to choose a constitution and a legislature to enact laws, and so on, all in accordance with the principles of justice initially agreed upon. Our social situation is just if it is such that by this sequence of hypothetical agreements we would have contracted into the general system of rules which defines it. Moreover, assuming that the original position does determine a set of principles, it will then be true that whenever social institutions satisfy these principles, those engaged in them can say to one another that they are cooperating on terms to which they would agree if they were free and equal persons whose relations with respect to one another were fair. They could all view their arrangements as meeting the stipulations which they would acknowledge in an initial situation that embodies widely accepted and reasonable constraints on the choice of principles. The general recognition of this fact would provide the basis for a public acceptance of the corresponding principles of justice. No society can, of course, be a scheme of cooperation which men enter voluntarily in a literal sense; each person finds himself placed at birth in some particular position in some particular society, and the nature of this position materially affects his life prospects. Yet a society satisfying the principles of justice as fairness comes as close as a society can to being a voluntary scheme, for it meets the principles which free and equal persons would assent to under circumstances that are fair.A just society, as conceptualized in the passage, can be best described as:
...

MCQ->Who is the author of Le Contract Social (The Social Contract)?...

MCQ->Pick out thể one word for - a secret arrangement...

MCQ->Social Contract Theory was advocated by...

MCQ-> Read the following passage and provide appropriate answers for the questionsThis is one of the unanswered questions that I want to explore. I believe that this is certainly one of the deeper questions about technology. Why do I say so? Without evolution technologies seem to be born independently and improve independently. Each must come from some unexplained mental process, some form of creativity or thinking outside the box that brings it into existence and separately develops it. With evolution, new technologies would be birthed in some precise way from previous ones, albeit with considerable mid-wifing, and develop though some understood process of adaptation. In other words, if we could understand evolution, we could understand the most precious of processes: innovation. But, let me define evolution before I proceed further. The word evolution has two general meanings. One is the gradual development of something, as with the evolution of ballet or the English madrigal. The other is the process by which all objects of some class are related by ties of common descent from the collection of earlier objects. The latter is what I mean by evolution.Which of the following can be inferred from the passage? I. The author’s main concern is to develop a theory of innovation. II. The author is interested in putting forth a theory of technological evolution. III. The author believes before developing a theory of technological evolution, one needs to investigated whether technology evolves at all. IV. Evolution, as the author puts it, is a sense of common relatedness....