Exam (elaborations)
IB Philosophy Essay: Political Obligation (23/25)
- Course
- Institution
- IB political philosophy essay on political obligation - Band 7 essay (23/25) - Essay is structured with subtitles and bullet points
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
RichardG
Reviews received
Content preview
POLITICAL OBLIGATIONIntroduction
Introductory Lines
The grounds for political obligation provide an understanding of the legitimacy of the state.
In this, if the state is shown to be legitimate, then we will have a duty to obey the laws that it
enforces.
Hence, the central question arises: What justifies the state?
Power and Authority
Here, it is important to make a distinction between power and authority, in which power is the
ability to make us do something and authority is the right to make us to something.
Consequently, if power is able to be exercised in a rightful, justified, and acceptable manner, then
this makes the state legitimate, thus giving it authority.
Evaluation
In this essay, I will evaluate a variety of theories of political obligation that argue for the legitimacy
of the state.
In this, I will operate under the principle that a successful theory of political obligation must explain
three key things: why everyone is obligated to obey the state, why we ought to obey laws that we
do not like, and how the state preserves freedom and equality.
As a result, I will argue that the natural duties approach, as advocated for by John Rawls, is the
most plausible theory, holding that the legitimacy of the state is founded on the basis of rights.
Hence, I will argue against theories of political obligation that assert consent to account for the
legitimacy of the state, namely those presented by Thomas Hobbes and John Locke.
I will also argue against philosophical anarchism and Communitarianism, showing these views to
suffer from multiple inherent and practical problems.
Conclusion
Therefore, in this essay, I will conclude the grounds for political obligation is best understood on the
basis of justice, as expressed in the natural duties approach.
Anarchism
General Theory
To begin, philosophical anarchism operates under the general claim that the existence of a state
cannot genuinely respect freedom and equality.
Hence, anarchists argue that the state is unnecessary and unjustified.
Two Key Reasons
They argue this principle on the basis of two key reasons.
1. Firstly, anarchists see the state as being coercive because it exists merely as a means to force
us to do things that we would otherwise choose not to do, thus opposing our individual freedom.
2. Secondly, anarchists understand the state to be hierarchical, in that the state is established on
the binary between a class of rulers and a class of the ruled, consequently opposing our
individual equality.
Therefore, anarchists maintain that if we are to have a commitment to individual freedom and
equality, one of the key principles of a functioning society, then we ought to reject the state on the
basis that it is unfair, unjust, and contrary to human liberty.
Criticisms
However, such a view has been heavily challenged throughout history.
1. First of all, if we are to accept the anarchist view, then it is certainly possible that we may have
a situation where people follow their individual private judgement in all circumstances, including
those of public concern. Hence, practically, anarchism seems like a recipe for chaos.
2. Additionally, as the anarchist state becomes increasingly realistic and less utopian, it becomes
hard to distinguish it from a liberal, democratic state, due to the fact that society will naturally
begin to establish rules and laws.
Therefore, whilst anarchism might seem like a utopian ideal, in reality, it is impractical, thus
showing it to now be necessary to consider alternative theories of political obligation.
The Social Contract Theory
, General Theory
One of the oldest theories of political obligation is presented in social contract theory, which argues
that the grounds of political obligation are to be based on consent.
Here, if citizens consent to a government, then we are capable of deriving the legitimacy of the
state.
Essentially, social contract theory provides an explanation of the origin of the state and defends its
authority by appealing to the notion that if you want to know if the state is necessary, then we
ought to imagine not having it.
Hobbes
Hypothetical Rational Consent
The first social contract theorist I will evaluate is Thomas Hobbes, who argues from a position of
hypothetical rational consent, which holds that society consents to a state because it is most
rational for us to do so. In this, Hobbes argues that consent should not be considered on a law-by-
law basis, but rather on an overall understanding of the system of laws in general.
Thus, if it benefits us to have a general system of laws, then it is rational for us to consent to living
under the authority of the state.
The State of Nature
Hobbes appeals to what he calls the “state of nature”, encouraging his readers to imagine a society
without a state.
As a result, he concludes that life in such a state would be “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”,
thus meaning that it would be better for everyone to live under the authority of a Leviathan (a
ruling, governing body).
In this, Hobbes portrays humans as being selfish, unsocial creatures that are driven by the needs of
survival and personal gain.
Therefore, in a state of nature, human life would be characterised by a constant struggle between
individuals in a battle for one’s own survival and personal gain. In explaining why, we ought to obey
laws that we do not like, Hobbes argues that we ought to consent to such laws on the basis that if
we don’t, then we will be stuck in a “state of nature”.
Suggestion
Hence, it would be irrational for us to not to consent to a governing state that has absolute power to
introduce laws because our self-preservation would be threatened.
Here, Hobbes sees humans to have the capacity to reason, thus showing his understanding that
humans are capable of making decisions that are in their own best interest (since he is a
psychological egoist).
Throughout, Hobbes does not claim that everyone has in fact consented to a state, but rather says
that it would be rational for everyone to do so, showing his theory to be based on hypothetical
rational consent.
Criticisms
Where Hobbes struggles the most is in his understanding of how a state preserves freedom and
equality.
1. Ronald Dworkin argues that a hypothetical contract is not simply a pale form of an actual
contract, but rather it is no contract at all. This is because if consent is only hypothetical, then it
is difficult to see how freedom can be preserved. Therefore, it is reasonable to claim that in
Hobbes’ theory of political obligation, there is no real freedom because we are all effectively
forced to agree to a social contract because the alternative is so dreadful.
2. Consequently, it has been argued that Hobbes gives us a false dilemma because he says that
we can either submit to the total authority of the state, or the brutality of a state of nature.
Therefore, it would be irrational not to submit to such a scenario.
3. Additionally, under Hobbes’ theory, once set up, the Leviathan wielding power exercises
unlimited and absolute authority over its subjects. Thus, the Leviathan would consequently
become undoubtedly superior to the individual, meaning that once people consent to join the
social contract, of which they are essentially forced to, they hand over all their rights including
their right to disagree.
Therefore, it seems very troubling to conclude that Hobbes’ social contract preserves individual
freedom and equality. As a result, I will conclude that Hobbes’ theory of political obligation cannot
provide a suitable understanding of the grounds of political obligation.
Locke
Tacit Consent
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller RichardG. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $19.98. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
75632 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now