Quote:
|
Originally Posted by horn
because i'm not going to be able to read both those writers' work in the next 5 minutes could you maybe briefly explain the difference between their "rights theory" and social contract theory(s) ?
|
A social contract usually implies some sort of "positive rights" (or duties) on behalf of either society or the individual (or both). So the individual must do x or y, in return for a or b. It generally involves surrendering some sort of rights they might have in a natural state (in return for security, or peace or whatnot).
Rights theory generally focuses on specific entities having natural rights by virtue of their status / characteristics (as thinking, conscious men). I've not read Nozick or Rand extensively so I can't comment too extensively on their version of it. But there's no real surrendering of freedoms in the same form as under social contract, and it's not a "contract" as such (either real or hypothetical). However, there is an element of presumed reciprocation in all of this since if you commit a crime then you are punished. But that's more to do with the use of force.
Read the Wiki entries for both "rights" and "social contract" to get a general summary, my explanation is pants.
