what is the definition of the Social Contract Theory?
155554
Social contract theory (or contractarianism) is a concept used in philosophy, political science and sociology to denote an implicit agreement within a state regarding the rights and responsibilities of the state and its citizens, or more generally a similar concord between a group and its members, or between individuals. All members within a society are assumed to agree to the terms of the social contract by their choice to stay within the society without violating the contract; such violation would signify a problematic attempt to return to the state of nature. Thomas Hobbes (1651), John Locke (1689) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762) are the most famous philosophers of contractarianism, which is the theoretical groundwork of democracy and some forms of socialism. It is also one of a few competing theoretical groundworks of liberalism.
155194
In the reign of Louis XVI, the growing discontent between the bourgeois and the nobility over issues of equality before the courts had grown acute and eventually led to the creation of the Third Estate and the French Revolution.\n\nWhile there was a body of laws in France at the time, the ruling class was able to prevail at will over the lesser classes and taxed almost everything (a man crossing a noble's estate and kicking up dust on the road was liable to pay a tax for the dust, for example). \n\nIn much the same way that John Locke created an idea that fired the American Revolution (that is the idea of a social contract between the governed and the governors), Rousseau argues that the social contract should be society-wide, from person to person.  Ergo, I am responsible to you, you are responsible to me, etc.  this would replace the idea of natural rights and right by birth.
350730
Thomas Jefferson used the social contract theory to say that since the king was not governing as the people needed, we had the right to form our own government. (Declaration of Independence)\n\nJames Madison wrote the Constitution. His first line was "We the people..."
716388
Smith laid the intellectual framework that explained the free market and still holds true today. He is most often recognized for the expression "the invisible hand," which he used to demonstrate how self-interest guides the most efficient use of resources in a nation's economy, with public welfare coming as a by-product. To underscore his laissez-faire convictions, Smith argued that state and personal efforts, to promote social good are ineffectual compared to unbridled market forces.\n\nThe Theory of Moral Sentiments\nSmith asks that most fundamental question: Why do we regard certain actions or intentions with approval and condemn others? The Theory of Moral Sentiments establishes a new liberalism, in which social organization is seen as the outcome of human action but not necessarily of human design.
191974
The theory of class struggle was proposed by Karl Marx in "The Communist Manifesto." It basically says that the worker class is exploited by the capitalist/employer class, and that at some point the workers of the world will unite and control their own work, killing or eliminating the capitalists.\nFor more, go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_struggle
328734
You mean, the relationship between a state (government) and the society governed?\n\nPlease post your question again, but with purpose and clarity.
107331
I'm not sure I agree with your definition of "civil society," but I will go with it.  Foundations, institutions, non-profit organizations and the like are all attempts to solve problems and meet needs without involving the government and tax money.  If we do this well enough, we can disassemble the beaurocracy created by government and operate voluntarily instead of compulsively.  That's the Libertarian ideal.
181391
Depends on what definition of liberal u mean. Economic or Social? Social liberalism means a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties whereas economic liberalism means an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets (otherwise known as capitalism). Lookin at it from a purely economic point of view the US is a helluva lot more BLOODY liberal than we are! All i can say is thank god i live in the UK!
667274
What economists call game theory psychologists call the theory of social situations, which is an accurate description of what game theory is about.\n\nSee the reference for much more information.
32280
Welfare systems have existed since ancient times.  Some use the term 'welfare state' to mean something negative, but the reason we all agree to be part of society in the first place is for the social welfare it provides.
1031695
The book concerns the structure of society.\n\nSee the Wikipedia article below.
1150939
It's a group of mathematical theories first developed by John Von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern. A game consists of a set of rules governing a competitive situation in which from two to n individuals or groups of individuals choose strategies designed to maximize their own winnings or to minimize their opponent's winnings; the rules specify the possible actions for each player, the amount of information received by each as play progresses, and the amounts won or lost in various situations. Von Neumann and Morgenstern restricted their attention to zero-sum games, that is, to games in which no player can gain except at another's expense.\nThis restriction was overcome by the work of John F. Nash during the early 1950s. Nash mathematically clarified the distinction between cooperative and noncooperative games. In noncooperative games, unlike cooperative ones, no outside authority assures that players stick to the same predetermined rules, and binding agreements are not feasible. Further, he recognized that in noncooperative games there exist sets of optimal strategies (so-called Nash equilibria) used by the players in a game such that no player can benefit by unilaterally changing his or her strategy if the strategies of the other players remain unchanged. Because noncooperative games are common in the real world, the discovery revolutionized game theory. Nash also recognized that such an equilibrium solution would also be optimal in cooperative games. He suggested approaching the study of cooperative games via their reduction to noncooperative form and proposed a methodology, called the Nash program, for doing so. Nash also introduced the concept of bargaining, in which two or more players collude to produce a situation where failure to collude would make each of them worse off.\n\nThe theory of games applies statistical logic to the choice of strategies. It is applicable to many fields, including military problems and economics. The Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences was awarded to Nash, John Harsanyi, and Reinhard Selten (1994) and to Robert J. Aumann and Thomas C. Schelling (2005) for work in applying game theory to aspects of economics.
629913
altruism\n\n\n\n\n\n\n...put others before you....\n\n\n\nsimply that
272166
It is Social contract theory (or contractarianism) is a concept used in philosophy, political science and sociology to denote an implicit agreement within a state regarding the rights and responsibilities of the state and its citizens, or more generally a similar concord between a group and its members, or between individuals. All members within a society are assumed to agree to the terms of the social contract by their choice to stay within the society without violating the contract; such violation would signify a problematic attempt to return to the state of nature. It has been often noted, indeed, that social contract theories relied on a specific anthropological conception of man as either "good" or "evil". Thomas Hobbes (1651), John Locke (1689) and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1762) are the most famous philosophers of contractarianism, which is the theoretical groundwork of democracy. It is also one of a few competing theoretical groundworks of liberalism.\n\nThe social contract, as a political theory, explains the justification and purpose of the state and of human rights. According to Hobbes' canonical theory, the essence is as follows: Without society, we would live in a state of nature, where we each have unlimited natural freedoms. The downside of this general autonomy is that it includes the freedom to harm and be harmed; there are no positive rights, only natural rights and an endless "war of all against all" (Bellum omnium contra omnes, Hobbes 1651). To avoid this, we jointly agree to an implicit social contract by which we each gain civil rights in return for accepting the obligation to honor the rights of others, giving up some freedoms to do so. The figurehead of the society we create, representing our joint interests as members and formed by the delegation of our power, is the sovereign state.\n\n[edit]\nA fictional state of nature?\nThe emergence of the social contract from the state of nature is often explained in terms of just-so stories whose goal is to show the logical basis of rights rather than attempting historical accuracy. Rousseau's 1754 Discourse on the Origin and Basis of Inequality Among Men is more a fictional account of what has passed than a realistic description of what happened. However, it is also true that the ambiguity persists, and that Hobbes' polemic conception of the state of nature (opposed to Rousseau's irenical conception of it) approach it from the realist description of civil war - the Leviathan may be read as an attempt to solve the problems lifted by the English Civil War (1642-1651).\n\n[edit]\nViolations of the contract\nThe social contract and the civil rights it gives us are neither "natural" nor permanently fixed. Rather, the contract itself is the means towards an end - the benefit of all - and, according to some philosophers such as Locke or Rousseau, is only legitimate to the extent that it satisfies our goals. Therefore, when failings are found in the contract, we renegotiate to change the terms, using methods such as elections and legislature; Locke theorized the right of rebellion in case of the contract leading to tyranny.\n\nSince rights come from agreeing to the contract, those who simply choose not to fulfill their contractual obligations, such as by committing crimes, risk losing some of their rights, and the rest of society can be expected to protect itself against the actions of such outlaws. To be a member of society is to accept responsibility for following its rules, along with the threat of punishment for violating them. Most of us are comfortable with laws punishing behavior that harms people because we are concerned about others harming us and don't plan on harming others. In this way, society works by "mutual coercion, mutually agreed upon" (Hardin 1968). [1] However, philosophers such as Michel Foucault and Gilles Deleuze have argued that this is a repressive conception, declaring that we
145823
Social work has always been subject to competing claims of definition and practice, as social workers, politicians, service users and policy makers have struggled to lay claims on what social work is, and what it might be.\n\nIn 2001, the International Association of Schools of Social Work and the International Federation of Social Work agreed the following definition:\n\nThe social work profession promotes social change, problem-solving in human relationships, and the empowerment and liberation of people to enhance well-being. Utilising theories of human behaviour and social systems, social work intervenes at points where people interact with their environments. Principles of human rights and social justice are fundamental to social work ( IASSW (International Association of Schools of Social Work), 2001).\n\nWhatever the legitimate or validated notion of social work is seen to be, from other perspectives, social work can be seen to be an agent of social control. Far from addressing the inequalities with which we live, it may well play an important role in sustaining or perpetuating the very social and economic system which promotes such inequalities. Rather than liberating, it can be viewed as oppressive and for that reason not true to the core values on which it claims to be based (Jordan and Parkinson, 2001; Jordan, 2004).
69467
Couldnt find anything about thier philosophy but I did find there website and they may be able to help you from there!\nhttp://www.co.humboldt.ca.us/hhs/socialservices/
513457
Law of Supply and Demand:\n\nIn a nutshell - If more people want something the more expensive it will be until there is more produced. When there is an excess amount produced (more than people want) Then the price will be less.