Podcasts about social contract theory

Kinsella on Liberty Podcast: Episode 496. Matt Sands of the Nations of Sanity project and I discuss the possible interrelationship between his project and my The Universal Principles of Liberty. Recorded Aug. 14, 2026. https://youtu.be/ET2ucqFU7Ak?si=VVcdipDX-umElPxR Related The Universal Principles of Liberty  Supplemental Principles | Kinsella's Annotations and Commentary KOL442 | Together Strong Debate vs. Walter Block on Voluntary Slavery (Matthew Sands of Nations of Sanity) Fusillo on the Universal Principles of Liberty and Liberland Libertarian Nation and Related Projects Liberland KOL480 | The Liberland Constitution and Libertarian Principles (Liberland Prague, 2025) The Voluntaryist Constitution Liberland Constitution Christmas Party Prague 2025 See also draft Liberland Constitution, Art. I, §1, ¶¶3, 4: The Universal Principles of Liberty, adopted on 14 August 2025 and as they stand on the date of adoption of this Constitution, are hereby incorporated by reference and may be consulted for interpretive and suppletive purposes, to the extent that they are not incompatible with the provisions of this Constitution. Any further amendment to the Universal Principles of Liberty shall have no force within Liberland unless adopted as an amendment to this Constitution in accordance with the procedures set forth herein. Note: In the discussion we disagree on whether the standard of proof in a normal property dispute should be preponderance of the evidence or beyond a reasonable doubt. In subsequent offline discussion I sent the following comments to Matt (edited): Thinking more about the preponderance of the evidence issue we discussed. See for example this tweet about a property owner using force to eject someone who is a trespasser: always causing problems pic.twitter.com/mdecFjVTnW — Wolverine land (@Breaking57) August 15, 2026 Note: the property owner didn't have to prove "beyond reasonable doubt" that they own the store to have the cops threaten force to eject him. Just like you don't have to "prove" "beyond a reasonable doubt" that you own your car, or your body, or are "not an aggressor," to have a right to use force against a trespasser/aggressor: someone attempting to use, alter the physical integrity of, or invade the borders of, your body or other resources that you own in accordance with principles of original appropriation and contractual transfer. Having rights, per se, has nothing to do with proof or standards. It's an if-then thing: if you have certain justified rights of exclusive control to certain resources, then you are justified in using force against the body or other resources possessed or owned by an aggressor. This general statement is not a statement about trials or proof in such fora. It's a statement about justifiable action. To return to one example I gave: if A and B claim grandpa's house (say, from his will), then if you use preponderance to award it to A, then later A can use that property claim to use force to prevent B from entering. Even that use of defensive force does not require any "proof." It is just the right of the owner. Matters of proof only apply in some later forum addressing the actions taken and seeking to recognize certain property rights claims or order punishment of a malfeasor. You have to keep in mind that things like the "right" to jury trial, due process, presumption of innocence, the exclusionary rule, beyond a reasonable doubt—none of these are actual rights. They are just "rights" that accompany being part of a political community: civil or political rights, not natural rights. They are just limits we want placed on powerful actors like the state. So, by arguing for employing the BRD standard in any forum determining ownership of a contested resource based on the general libertarian principles of self-ownership, original appropriation, contract, and rectification, you are importing standards that really meant as limits on the state's power, into how property rights are determined, applied, recognized, and enforced. There is simply no reason to do this. These things are not really even related. Property rights emerge as normative support for natural aspects of action such as control of one's body and homesteading and trading of external scarce resources. See On Property Rights in Superabundant Bananas and Property Rights as Normative Support for Possession. These principles have nothing to do with the state: only with (a) human action, praxeology, economics (descriptive); and (b) society and human interaction: norms, rights (normative). It is possible to have, and to imagine, any of the following, without a state invovled: (a) isolated Robinsonades, with human action and praxeology only (and personal, but not interpersonal, morals); (b) a non-normative society with trade and interaction, both cooperative and conflictual, a might-makes-right society; (c) a stateless normative society laws and rights that provide normative support for the natural aspects of action such as control of one's body and homesteading and trading of external scarce resources (and this society can be either pre-catallactic, or employ money). You can also have (d) something like (c) but with a state that undermines the normative role of private law and rights and is instead a sort of hybrid between (b) and (c). And when you have a state that assumes the power to create and enforce law including imposing punishment or sanctions on people for violating the state's criminal law, the state's claim of authority is usually cloaked in a variety of coverings that masque or even pretend to or maybe do blunt its nature. In other words, the balance between the state and its power and the populace it governs hinges on the great fiction of the state which is maintained by propaganda, by the state giving at least lip service to some obligations and duties that it has, some limits on its power, such as heeding the due process and other political or civil rights of its subjects; this can be done organically, as in Britain's unwritten "constitution," or in a written constitution such as the US Constitution that claims to authorize and limit a new state. The limits can be implied or stated as limits on power: such as in the enumerated powers structure of the constitution itself, (( See, e.g., Thomas B. McAffee, “Federalism and the Protection of Rights: The Modern Ninth Amendment's Spreading Confusion [2],” Brigham Young University Law Review 1996, no. 2 (1996): 351–388 (arguing that the framers regarded the Constitution's limited/enumerated powers scheme itself as a primary structural guarantor of popular rights, and that the Ninth Amendment was designed to preserve that federal structure against the risk that enumerating specific rights would be misread as creating a government of general powers limited only by the listed rights); idem, “The Bill of Rights, Social Contract Theory, and the Rights ‘Retained' by the People,” Southern Illinois University Law Journal 16 (1992): 267–305  (arguing that the “other rights retained by the people” under the Ninth Amendment are those secured residually by the Constitution's grant of only limited, enumerated powers to the national government, so that the amendment protects the original limited-powers design rather than authorizing judicial enforcement of unenumerated natural rights outside the written Constitution). )) or in statements about that the government may not do, or in "rights" such as those in the Bill of Rights that also limit federal government power. But such rights are not always real rights. (( By "real rights," as I am not speaking to a civil law audience, I do not mean what the civil law means, which is property rights pertaining to a "thing," a "res" (droits réels, derechos reales, iura in re), rights enforceable against the whole world (erga omnes)—as opposed to personal rights (droits personnels, iura in personam), rights against a specific person (typically arising from obligations/contracts) (which I object to in my theory of contracts; see The Title-Transfer Theory of Contract; KOL495 | “Rothbard's Revolutionary Contract Theory,” Sociedad de la Libertad Latam (Peru): Rothbard 100: A Legacy for Future Generations). Instead I mean actual or legitimate rights, those recognized by libertarianism. )) If you wanted to limit federal power and prevent it from regulating normal crimes like murder and leave that demesne to the states, you could (attempt to) set up a government of enumerated and limited powers and just omit that power from the list. You could add something like the Tenth Amendment to emphasize the point that was already implied. This does not mean citizens have the right to commit murder, only that the fedgov has no jurisdiction over this. (( See my similar jurisdictional argument in KOL443 | Abortion: A Radically Decentralist Approach (PFS 2024). I argue that the external legal system has no jurisdiction over abortion, even if it is "murder"; it is governed by the mother's legal system itself. )) For other rights, actual rights like the right to bear arms or free speech, you could again protect this right from federal encroachment in multiple ways: you limit congress's power to regulate these activities by denying them a grant of power in an enumerated and limited powers scheme constitution; or you add a Bill of Rights limiting federal power; or both, for "great caution" as Madison said: The exceptions here or elsewhere in the Constitution, made in favor of particular rights, shall not be so construed as to diminish the just importance of other rights retained by the people, or as to enlarge the powers delegated by the Constitution; but either as actual limitations of such powers, or as inserted merely for greater caution. You could also limit the state by requiring it to respect "fake" "rights" of the citizens, like "due process,...

54 MinutesSafe for WorkGeorge Bagby is a content creator and publisher of long-forgotten books. George joins Pete to continue a series detailing the long lead up to America's Civil War.George's "Buy Me a Coffee"George's Twitter AccountGeorge's Pinned Tweet w/ Links George's YouTube ChannelPete and Thomas777 'At the Movies'Support Pete on His WebsitePete's PatreonPete's Substack Pete's SubscribestarPete's GUMROADPete's VenmoPete's Buy Me a CoffeePete on FacebookPete on TwitterBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-pete-quinones-show--6071361/support.

Social contract theory was used to critique a form of the state, but was also used to legitimize the modern nation-state.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/great-reversal-how-social-contract-theory-became-state-apologetics

Social contract theory was used to critique a form of the state, but was also used to legitimize the modern nation-state.Original article: https://mises.org/mises-wire/great-reversal-how-social-contract-theory-became-state-apologetics

In Episode 1 Jonathan introduces Lysander Spooner and begins discussion on his essay “No Treason: The Constitution of No Authority,” covering a recap on Social Contract Theory, Natural Law requirements for a legally binding contract, and Section 1 of Spooner's essay.

03:07 The Importance of Family and Proximity05:57 Cultural Expectations vs. Family Values09:13 Personal Experiences with Family Dynamics12:01 Entrepreneurship and Family-Centered Economies15:00 Teaching Kids About Bitcoin18:13 Bitcoin as a Legacy20:59 The Role of Bitcoin in Family Life24:05 Cultural Critique of Silicon Valley26:48 Spiritual Parallels and Humility in Bitcoin34:21 The Baklava Bitcoin Connection35:14 Tech and Humanity: A Christian Perspective37:16 Understanding Social Contract Theory43:08 The Practical Implications of Social Contracts46:52 Political Theology and Evangelical Leaders47:52 Reflections on John Piper's Influence01:01:10 Navigating Controversy in Theology

On this episode, we'll hear a book panel discussion on David Schmidtz's book, Living Together: Inventing Moral Science (Oxford University Press, 2023). In his comments, Schmidtz discusses his academic journey and the reshaping of his philosophical views, emphasizing real-world observations over theoretical debates, and comments on the work of Adam Smith and David Hume. He stresses the necessary role of humility in sciences and highlights how game theory has challenged the pre-existing theoretical frameworks of human behavior, underscoring the limitations of theories in explaining complex, human interactions. The panel is moderated by Peter J. Boettke, and they are joined on the panel by:Ryan Muldoon, Associate Professor of Philosophy, Director of Undergraduate Studies in the Department of Philosophy, and the Director of the Philosophy, Political Science, and Economics Program at the University at Buffalo, and author of Social Contract Theory for a Diverse World: Beyond ToleranceMargaret Schabas, Canadian Philosopher and Professor of Philosophy and Economics at the University of British Columbia and author of A Philosopher's Economist: Hume and the Rise of CapitalismDavid Schmidtz is the Presidential Chair of Moral Sciences and the Director of the Social Philosophy and Policy Center at West Virginia University. He is a Distinguished Affiliated Fellow with the F. A. Hayek Program for Advanced Study in Philosophy, Politics, and Economics and editor-in-chief of Social Philosophy & Policy.If you like the show, please subscribe, leave a 5-star review, and tell others about the show! We're available on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, Amazon Music, and wherever you get your podcasts.Virtual Sentiments, our new podcast series from the Hayek Program is now streaming! Subscribe today and listen to season two, now releasing!Follow the Hayek Program on Twitter: @HayekProgramLearn more about Academic & Student ProgramsFollow the Mercatus Center on Twitter: @mercatusCC Music: Twisterium

In continuing our study of John Locke's two treatises on government, today I finish up looking at his second treatise. The premise of Locke's version of Social Contract Theory is that, at some point in the past, everyone was completely independent and free but then explicitly consented to form a government. Locke does not explain when this meeting took place, or why it resulted in a system of majority rule for those who consented. Those who come later still have to consent, but Locke fails to point out that later generations only need to give implicit, or silent, consent. The problem with these two different forms of consent is that no serious long-term relationship can be based purely on consent, whether implicit or explicit. We see the failure of this concept in many different areas within our culture. As always, if you have any law/government related questions, feel free to email me at thegbgpodcast@gmail.com, and I will be happy to address them on the program. Thank you and God bless! Follow me on Facebook or Twitter or go to www.ericluppold.com Please support me on Patreon!

In continuing our study of John Locke's two treatises on government, today I finish up looking at his second treatise. The premise of Locke's version of Social Contract Theory is that, at some point in the past, everyone was completely independent and free but then explicitly consented to form a government. Locke does not explain when this meeting took place, or why it resulted in a system of majority rule for those who consented. Those who come later still have to consent, but Locke fails to point out that later generations only need to give implicit, or silent, consent. The problem with these two different forms of consent is that no serious long-term relationship can be based purely on consent, whether implicit or explicit. We see the failure of this concept in many different areas within our culture. As always, if you have any law/government related questions, feel free to email me at thegbgpodcast@gmail.com, and I will be happy to address them on the program. Thank you and God bless! Follow me on Facebook or Twitter or go to www.ericluppold.com Please support me on Patreon!

Lyndeurozone.com  Patreon If you use this podcast regularly would you please consider supporting us on Patreon for as little as a dollar a month?  The Euro Simplified Podcast has no advertising revenue and is produced by a public school teacher.  We love and appreciate our supporters on Patreon as our supporters help us meet the costs associated with the production of this free resource for students. Episodes will be released on the following schedule: Unit 1 and Unit 2 - August/September Unit 3: October Unit 4: November Unit 5: November and December Unit 6: January Unit 7: Late January & February Unit 8 : March Unit 9: April   If you have any questions you can contact Robert Lynde at Lyndeurozone.com.   Instagram: @Lyndeurozone  

Our guest this week is Professor Albert Weale, Emeritus Professor of Political Theory and Public Policy at UCL. Following an event honouring his career on his retirement, in this episode, we're exploring Albert's life and work as an academic.Over his career, Albert has published 20 books and more than 150 articles and book chapters on a diverse and impressive array of topics, from the politics of pollution, political legitimacy in the European Union and healthcare, to social contract theory and democracy. He has held faculty positions at Newcastle, York, UEA, Essex and, of course, for more than a decade, here at UCL.The event held in his honour had an impressive 28 speakers, discussing the prospects for practical public reason, priority setting in healthcare and the best form of social contract theory, and motivating our tackling of climate change, among many other issues. It highlighted the sheer range, depth and importance of the contributions that he has made to the field, both as a political theorist and, above all, as perhaps the leading scholar of the intersection between political theory and public policy.In this episode we're exploring some of these contributions, looking back on a long and successful career.

If you enjoyed this episode, check out Canon+! You can get your first month for 99 cents with promo code DOUG99: https://mycanonplus.com/

In this second part of our look at the Enlightenment we study three philosophers that promote the idea that government exists because the people allow it to exist... The Social Contract. Do you want to get that 5?  Enter code “GO4FIVE” at checkout for 25% OFF the Lyndeurozone Online Resources! Online access expires June 15th, 2023. Lyndeurozone.com  Patreon If you use this podcast regularly would you please consider supporting us on Patreon for as little as a dollar a month?  The Euro Simplified Podcast has no advertising revenue and is produced by a public school teacher.  We love and appreciate our supporters on Patreon as our supporters help us meet the costs associated with the production of this free resource for students. Episodes will be released on the following schedule: Unit 1 and Unit 2 - August/September Unit 3: October Unit 4: November Unit 5: November and December Unit 6: January Unit 7: Late January & February Unit 8 : March Unit 9: April If you have any questions you can contact Robert Lynde at Lyndeurozone.com.

Andrew Kern is the author of the book The Myth of the Social Contract: Refuting Common Arguments for Government Authority. We talked about why the […]

In this episode we analyze 4 cultural thought patterns which are influencing the culture around us: Darwinism, Marxism, Postmodernism, and Social Contract Theory. These 4 thought patterns help explain many of the problems we see in Western culture.

In this episode, Martha Nussbaum's critical objection to Social Contract Theory is discussed. There is concern for the implications of certain conditions limiting participants in the Social Contract and how those constraints affect how moral duties are ascribed. Listen to hear how Nussbaum's critique of Social Contract Theory can be extended to highlight how the theory excludes some human beings.

Legal scholar Jenna Ellis explains how our Supreme Court has stepped outside their bounds, attempting to use Social Contract Theory rather than the Constitution and why a Convention of States may be the solution.

In this second part of our look at the Enlightenment we study three philosophers that promote the idea that government exists because the people allow it to exist... The Social Contract.

Vance is NOT a fan of social contract theory. Bart believes that social contracts can exist, but stay implicit as they are ever-changing.

Vance is NOT a fan of social contract theory. Bart believes that social contracts can exist, but stay implicit as they are ever-changing.

Vance is NOT a fan of social contract theory. Bart believes that social contracts can exist, but stay implicit as they are ever-changing.

"Thus, neither a nation nor a State can arise out of contract between individuals. A sum of individual wills does not produce a common will. The renunciation of any number of private rights does not produce any public right." Written by J.K. Bluntschli Narrated by Brandon Lenig Read Along: https://www.nationalreformation.org/post/a-criticism-of-social-contract-theory

"Thus, neither a nation nor a State can arise out of contract between individuals. A sum of individual wills does not produce a common will. The renunciation of any number of private rights does not produce any public right." Written by J.K. Bluntschli Narrated by Brandon Lenig Read Along: https://www.nationalreformation.org/post/a-criticism-of-social-contract-theory

Law and Morality is interwoven in such a way that sometimes it is so difficult to understand the relationship between them. I have tried to explain the concept with the help of Social Contract Theory.. Where in the Subjects (citizens) willingly give up/surrender their freedoms, rights to the State (Government) and in return seeks guarantee that State shall protect their life, property and Liberty.. When state abuses its power by passing draconian laws, punish its citizens for any unwarranted action against State, there is a breach of Morality, principles of Natural Justice..

Social Contract Theory is a theory that the State's legitimate and justified authority over the individual is based on a mutual agreement between the individual and the State. In theory, we agree to give up certain rights (e.g. the right to steal your neighbor's cows) and in exchange, the State protects our other rights (e.g. the right to private property). Thomas Hobbes was one of the earliest proponents of Social Contract Theory. Writing in the bloody aftermath of the English Civil War, Hobbes argued that the State's authority is only justified if it can maintain peace and prevent civil war. However, Hobbes concluded that the only way a State can prevent civil war is if it is ruled by a Sovereign with absolute, unlimited power: the Leviathan.

At CEE, we think a lot about good teaching. This is the second episode in our 2021 Teaching Series. Susan Kennedy is a postdoctoral fellow in philosophy at Harvard University, where she works with the Embedded EthiCS team to integrate ethical reasoning into the computer science curriculum. In this episode, Susan talks about teaching non-canonical texts, using games to teach feminist critiques of social contract theory, teaching students how to conference, and offers some advice for teaching STEM students. Susan says: "I think their interest just goes through the roof when you can present the material in an interactive and engaging way, as opposed to just having a lesson plan, where I'm, you know, lecturing about feminist critiques or something like that." If you'd like to learn more about the simulation or the conference guide, Susan invites you to contact her: https://www.susan-kennedy.com/ Episode transcript How do you engage your philosophy students? Send us an email or leave us a voice message. Interview recorded at APA Central, February 2020. Music is Summer Melody by Ketsa and Cascades by Podington Bear. Produced by Carrie Welsh.

Dr. Kyle Swan, Associate Professor of Philosophy and Director of the Center for Practical and Professional Ethics at Cal State Sacramento chats with students at the Honors LLC. He discusses themes related to John Locke, Thomas Hobbes, Social Contract Theory, covenants, the state of nature, and social ethics.

In this episode: Aristotle's Rhetorical Triangle, how I escaped a cult, why we must care about others, and how it can all be applied to persuasion, art creation, ideology, and modern life. We delve into some of the philosophical reasons behind what makes one “good” at rhetoric. I talk about how some of Lacan's, Freud's, and Jung's psychological writings can be used to cultivate authority, humanity, and logic. As I explain each pillar of the triangle, I'll then use that same method to analyze my own life to give a better idea of who I am: my ethos of what led me to co-found Jam Street Media, the pathos of my grandmother's imperative to me, and the logos of the book that caused my exodus from religion. My Photography - www.instagram.com/faseycrancoMy Twitter - www.Twitter.com/faseycrancoMy Website - CaseyFranco.comJam Street Media - JamStreetMedia.comSuggest a topic: godsmastersandclout@gmail.comChapters -00:56 - Episode Introduction4:20 - The Rhetorical Triangle14:40 - Ethos (The Concept)30:55 - My Ethos (What I'm Credible to Speak On)39:24 - Pathos (The Concept)55:16 - My Pathos (How My Grandmother Sees Me)1:00:10 - Logos (The Concept)1:12:45 - My Logos (Using Logic to Escape a Cult)1:29:53 - The Wrap-upLinks and Citations -School of Liberal Arts Rhetorical Triangle Analysis - https://www.lsu.edu/hss/english/files/university_writing_files/item35402.pdfSalvoj Zizek on Gratification of Capitalist Consumption - https://youtu.be/P18UK5IMRDIManipulation vs Persuasion by Michael Roberts - https://medium.com/@michaelwroberts/the-difference-between-persuasion-and-manipulation-27eb4c02fd2dMeerkat Facts - https://www.natgeokids.com/au/discover/animals/general-animals/meerkat-facts/Social Contract Theory - https://iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/Michael Heumer, The Problem of Political Authority: An Examination of the Right to Coerce and the Duty to ObeyLiberalism - https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/art_sci_etds/244/Stanley Milgram's Experiment on Obedience and Authority - https://www.sparknotes.com/psychology/psych101/socialpsychology/section7/How to understand power - Eric Liu - https://youtu.be/c_Eutci7ackLacan's “Big Other” - http://www.english.hawaii.edu/criticalink/lacan/terms/other.htmlFreud's “Superego” - https://www.simplypsychology.org/psyche.htmlSam Harris on Freewill and Genetic determinism - https://samharris.org/the-illusion-of-free-will/Lacan on Desire - https://www.lacanonline.com/2010/05/what-does-lacan-say-about-desire/Zizek on the lack of a “Big Other” - "What is the big other?" - The Pervert's Guide To Ideology 2012 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wwIDNW89AqQTurlock's churches - https://townsquarepublications.com/turlock-worship/Videos I made for iHeart -Lacan on “The Subject” - http://www.english.hawaii.edu/criticalink/lacan/terms/subject.htmlEmpathy - https://lesley.edu/article/the-psychology-of-emotional-and-cognitive-empathy#:~:text=According%20to%20Hodges%20and%20Myers,but%20without%20the%20self%20actuallyEffects of the Agricultural Revolution - https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-hccc-worldhistory2/chapter/effects-of-the-agricultural-revolution/#:~:text=The%20increase%20in%20agricultural%20production,loosely%20regulated%20agricultural%20market%2C%20andYuval Noah Harari on Human Superiority - https://ideas.ted.com/why-humans-run-the-world/Lacan's “Signifiers” - https://nosubject.com/SignifierReptile Brain vs Mammalian Brain - https://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/d/d_05/d_05_cr/d_05_cr_her/d_05_cr_her.htmlGenetic predisposition vs Experience - https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-nature-versus-nurture-2795392Structuralism - Calhoun, Craig, ed. 2002. "Structuralism." In Dictionary of the Social Sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN9780195123715.Joseph Campbell's “The Hero With a Thousand Faces” - https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/588138.The_Hero_With_a_Thousand_FacesDavid Hume's Moral Philosophy - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-moral/Lacan's “Signifiers” - https://nosubject.com/SignifierLacan's “The Real” - https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/psychoanalysis/definitions/real.htmlPriming - https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/basics/primingCarl Jung on “The Stages of Life” - https://www.philosophicalsociety.com/archives/Carl%20Jung's%20Stages%20of%20Life.htmInitiations into Adulthood - https://robertmoore-phd.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=page.display&page_id=35Inductive vs Deductive Reasoning - https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/inductive-deductive-reasoning/The Scientific Method - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-method/Rationalism vs Empiricism - https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/rationalism-empiricism/Hypothetico-Deductive Reasoning - https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetico-deductive_modelScience and Absolute Truth - https://bit.ly/3bG4VAwThe Validity of The Theory of Evolution - https://www.globaltruthproject.com/single-post/the-present-truth-about-life?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIjY6Jtt7c6wIVl4WRCh3AcgsjEAAYASAAEgKNsfD_BwEPhilosophy Tube - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q8NVy00tfdICrime Correlates Poverty -  https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=242128How race corresponds to poverty - https://inequality.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Pathways_SOTU_2017_poverty.pdfThe Lies of “The Bell Curve” - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UBc7qBS1UjoSFX and Music -GMaC Theme by Camille StennisAmericana Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 Licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/Ancient Rite Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 Licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/Kalimba Relaxation Music Kevin MacLeod (incompetech.com)Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 3.0 Licensehttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/Sonatina in C Minor performed by Kevin MacLeod

A dive into the constitutionality of small government and how this evolved from the social contract theory.

Greg interacts with a caller who challenges his view on the social contract theory of morality.Topics:A challenge to Greg’s view on the social contract theory of morality (03:00)Download the mp3...Mentioned on the Show: reTHINK Apologetics Student Conference – February 28–29 in Dallas, TX; April 24–25 in Birmingham, ALRelated Links:Relativism: Feet Firmly Planted in Mid-Air by Greg Koukl and Francis Beckwith

We live in a train. A train called society. The train is the leviathan, the great beast that keeps us alive by keeping us in chains. Within the train there are many narratives. They may all be lies. The question is, do we keep the train as is, do we try to change it, or do we blow it to bits? This is the history of Western Social Contract Theory, on a train.  Social Contract Theory: https://www.iep.utm.edu/soc-cont/ WonkaPiercer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jEX52h1TvuA Support us at Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/0G  Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/0gPhilosophy Join our Facebook discussion group (make sure to answer the questions to join): https://www.facebook.com/groups/985828008244018/  Email us at: philosophersinspace@gmail.com If you have time, please write us a review on iTunes. It really really helps. Please and thank you! Sibling shows: Serious Inquiries Only: https://seriouspod.com/ Opening Arguments: https://openargs.com/  Embrace the Void: https://voidpod.com/ Recent appearances: Here's the audio from Aaron's Syndey Moral Luck talk! Sorry the questions are hard to hear. https://voidpod.com/podcasts/2019/9/7/aarons-sydney-skeptics-moral-luck-talk CONTENT PREVIEW: Snowpiercer and Social Contact Theory

Is there such a thing as right and wrong, or is morality a fabrication of social and evolutionary design? Enlightenment thinkers, such as Hobbes and Rousseau, believed that morality is a social construct. Contemporary atheist philosophers, like Paul Kurtz and Michael Ruse, are convinced that evolutionary biology is responsible for a sense of morality. Judeo-Christian thinkers throughout millennia have said that moral laws require a moral law giver. And Friedrich Nietzsche dismisses the entire conversation, arguing that all morals are illusory constraints adopted by weak willed peons.NotesThe featured painting is an oil on canvas by Caspar David Friedrich, painted in 1818. It is titled, "Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog." I selected it because it is widely considered one of the greatest masterpieces from the Romantic Era––an era that was destroyed by the horrors of the 20th century. Furthermore, it seems to beautifully symbolize man as Nietzsche sees him. A lone wanderer navigating a mysterious and unknown future. The tone and color matches Nietzsche's work brilliantly.The featured piece is by Hanz Liszt, a Hungarian composer of the 19th century and contemporary of Nietzsche. The piece, Sonata in B Minor, is one of the most influential and powerful sonatas after Beethoven's. Similarly to the chosen artwork, it, too, marks the best and last one of its kind before the death of Romanticism after World War 1.LinksVisit our website: https://www.wellreadchristian.comCheck our our blog: https://www.wellreadchristian.com/blogFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/wellreadchristianTwitter: https://www.twitter.com/WellReadChrist1Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCfGxz4OH1-hVD0fL9AWR4Xg

Bo and Bud discuss the Social Contract Theory.

In this second part of our look at the Enlightenment we study three philosophers that promote the idea that government exist because the people allow it to exist... The Social Contract.

In his book Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes famously imagines human beings in a state of nature where life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” People will, Hobbes argues, quickly flee such a terrible condition, creating for their own protection a mighty Sovereign and enter into a social contract. Dr. Perrodin discusses how Hobbes' perspective on the absolute need for social constructs manifested in the unfathomable harbor rescue of 500,000 people from Lower Manhattan on 09/01/2001 and again when Cajun Navy Relief rescued countless numbers of people stranded by Hurricanes Irma and Harvey in 2017. Something is stirring in the field of social contract theory. WHO WAS THOMAS HOBBES? Thomas Hobbes lived through the English Civil War.  The long and bloody struggle between the parliament and crown motivated and shaped his political ideas.  Hobbes studied how people lived together - without killing each other! LEVIATHAN AND SOCIAL CONTRACTS. Leviathan rigorously argues that civil peace and social unity are best achieved by the establishment of a commonwealth through social contract. Hobbes's ideal commonwealth is ruled by a sovereign power responsible for protecting the security of the commonwealth and granted absolute authority to ensure the common defense. In his introduction, Hobbes describes this commonwealth as an "artificial person" and as a body politic that mimics the human body. IMPLICATIONS FOR SCHOOL SAFETY. Schools are investing in expensive, unproven, or proven for a very narrow benefit (bollards) items. Parents are more willing than ever to surrender rights to privacy in exchange for safer schools. But, is this necessary, where does it end, and what happens to the social contract when parents have nothing left to offer to the state? Dr. Perrodin argues that there is virtually no questioning, no deliberations - the safety grants are there and most schools can make changes to buildings to improve safety and it's exempted from spending caps - but again, is this making schools safer or just moving the targets? He also states that short-term social contracts in which people severed their contract with the state and replaced it with a contract with Cajun Navy Relief, for example, is actually a very positive sign for the future of enabling rescue systems to organically arise during a crisis. FOLLOW DR. PERRODIN: Twitter @SafetyPhD and subscribe to The Safety Doc YouTube channel & Apple Podcasts. SAFETY DOC WEBSITE & BLOG: www.safetyphd.com David will respond to comments & emails. The Safety Doc Podcast is hosted & produced by David Perrodin, PhD. ENDORSEMENTS. Opinions are those of the host & guests and do not reflect positions of The 405 Media or supporters of “The Safety Doc Podcast”. The show adheres to nondiscrimination principles while seeking to bring forward productive discourse & debate on topics relevant to personal or institutional safety. Email David: thesafetydoc@gmail.com LOOKING FOR DR. TIMOTHY LUDWIG, PHD? Dr. Perrodin's “Safety Doc Podcast” negotiates school and community safety. To be informed about industrial safety, please contact Appalachian State University Professor Dr. Timothy Ludwig, PhD, at www.safety-doc.com.

My guest today is Ryan Muldoon of the University at Buffalo. He is the author of Social Contract Theory for a Diverse World: Beyond Tolerance. We discuss the role of perspective diversity in political philosophy, with reference to both Ryan's book and his article, Diversity and Disagreement are the Solution, Not the Problem. We relate the philosophy to political divides in the real world, such as the rise of nationalist movements in Europe.  

Dexter Buxton joins That Old Pod as this week's special guest to talk about how recent events have dramatically increased the average American's political involvement and awareness. Discussion carriers over to what issues are most important facing us today, possible solutions, and their impact on quality of life. Also some discussion of growing up LDS. Show Notes:Free educationLucio theory is wrong, women just get paid less in the same roleStatistics of men's lack of house workSocial contractSocial Contract by Hobbes, Locke and RousseauDems platform for education GOP platform for education Jim camera faceSeattle May Day protestsPolice cheering protesters during women’s marchPost election racial hateObamas Supreme Court nomination of Merrick GarlandWhat is single payer health careIs single payer health care a good idea?Obama’s Climate Action PlanClimate Action Plan not good enoughTrump repeals Climate Action PlanApple and Wal-Mart following Climate Action Plan despite repealLucio wrong with water level again, point still standsSeattle bag banEnergy costs of plastic bags/paper/canvas (need to use a canvas bag ~400x to be beneficial)Cost of a Boeing 757Some estimates at the cost of developing a new AirplaneHyperloop does not need a vacuum to achieve speeds of 700 mphSpace elevator design History of illicit drugs in USHTC Vive Google Tilt Brush for HTC Vive and OculusMicrosoft HoloLensMagic LeapVH1 Pop Up VideoBBC SherlockTimeX interface and manualsSeattle removing street parkingBoston’s Big DigAlaskan viaduct finally completedNano spring battery technologyApple Tesla acquisition talks  

On this episode of Liberty Under Attack, I am once again joined by our creative consultant, Kyle Rearden. The foundation of this episode is George H. Smith’s article titled Can Abolitionists Vote or Take Office Under the United States Constitution? It is part of an ongoing series, wherein Smith discusses the abolitionist movement and their […] The post Social Contract Theory & More Arguments Against Political Action (LUA Podcast #24, 3/5/17) appeared first on Liberty Under Attack.

The idea that a political order derives its authority, legitimacy, and justification from some kind of initial agreement or contract, whether hypothetical or tacit, has been a mainstay of political philosophy, at least since Hobbes. Today, the leading approach to theorizing justice–John Rawls’ conception of “justice as fairness”– employs a contract doctrine, albeit of a somewhat modified kind. There, too, the idea is that an initial agreement, struck under special conditions of fairness, settles the principles of justice that will govern a society. The fundamental thought driving social contract theories is undeniably intuitive: What else could justify social rules and principles but the agreement of those who are to live under them? But, of course, there are fairly obvious problems with the very idea of a hypothetical prosocial fair agreement that results in principles and rules to govern actual societies. In Social Contract Theory for a Diverse World: Beyond Tolerance (Routledge, 2017), Ryan Muldoon (SUNY Buffalo) launches an original kind of criticism of social contract theory, both in its classical and current formulations. According to Muldoon, extant social contract theories do not take sufficient account of diversity. Muldoon then proposes a revised version of social contract theory, and also a reorientation in political philosophy itself. In Muldoon’s hands, social contract theory is not aimed primarily at the production and justification of principles of justice; rather, the social contract is a tool of discovery in an ongoing social experiment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The idea that a political order derives its authority, legitimacy, and justification from some kind of initial agreement or contract, whether hypothetical or tacit, has been a mainstay of political philosophy, at least since Hobbes. Today, the leading approach to theorizing justice–John Rawls’ conception of “justice as fairness”– employs a contract doctrine, albeit of a somewhat modified kind. There, too, the idea is that an initial agreement, struck under special conditions of fairness, settles the principles of justice that will govern a society. The fundamental thought driving social contract theories is undeniably intuitive: What else could justify social rules and principles but the agreement of those who are to live under them? But, of course, there are fairly obvious problems with the very idea of a hypothetical prosocial fair agreement that results in principles and rules to govern actual societies. In Social Contract Theory for a Diverse World: Beyond Tolerance (Routledge, 2017), Ryan Muldoon (SUNY Buffalo) launches an original kind of criticism of social contract theory, both in its classical and current formulations. According to Muldoon, extant social contract theories do not take sufficient account of diversity. Muldoon then proposes a revised version of social contract theory, and also a reorientation in political philosophy itself. In Muldoon’s hands, social contract theory is not aimed primarily at the production and justification of principles of justice; rather, the social contract is a tool of discovery in an ongoing social experiment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The idea that a political order derives its authority, legitimacy, and justification from some kind of initial agreement or contract, whether hypothetical or tacit, has been a mainstay of political philosophy, at least since Hobbes. Today, the leading approach to theorizing justice–John Rawls’ conception of “justice as fairness”– employs a contract doctrine, albeit of a somewhat modified kind. There, too, the idea is that an initial agreement, struck under special conditions of fairness, settles the principles of justice that will govern a society. The fundamental thought driving social contract theories is undeniably intuitive: What else could justify social rules and principles but the agreement of those who are to live under them? But, of course, there are fairly obvious problems with the very idea of a hypothetical prosocial fair agreement that results in principles and rules to govern actual societies.  In Social Contract Theory for a Diverse World: Beyond Tolerance (Routledge, 2017), Ryan Muldoon (SUNY Buffalo) launches an original kind of criticism of social contract theory, both in its classical and current formulations. According to Muldoon, extant social contract theories do not take sufficient account of diversity. Muldoon then proposes a revised version of social contract theory, and also a reorientation in political philosophy itself. In Muldoon’s hands, social contract theory is not aimed primarily at the production and justification of principles of justice; rather, the social contract is a tool of discovery in an ongoing social experiment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The idea that a political order derives its authority, legitimacy, and justification from some kind of initial agreement or contract, whether hypothetical or tacit, has been a mainstay of political philosophy, at least since Hobbes. Today, the leading approach to theorizing justice–John Rawls’ conception of “justice as fairness”– employs a contract doctrine, albeit of a somewhat modified kind. There, too, the idea is that an initial agreement, struck under special conditions of fairness, settles the principles of justice that will govern a society. The fundamental thought driving social contract theories is undeniably intuitive: What else could justify social rules and principles but the agreement of those who are to live under them? But, of course, there are fairly obvious problems with the very idea of a hypothetical prosocial fair agreement that results in principles and rules to govern actual societies. In Social Contract Theory for a Diverse World: Beyond Tolerance (Routledge, 2017), Ryan Muldoon (SUNY Buffalo) launches an original kind of criticism of social contract theory, both in its classical and current formulations. According to Muldoon, extant social contract theories do not take sufficient account of diversity. Muldoon then proposes a revised version of social contract theory, and also a reorientation in political philosophy itself. In Muldoon’s hands, social contract theory is not aimed primarily at the production and justification of principles of justice; rather, the social contract is a tool of discovery in an ongoing social experiment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The idea that a political order derives its authority, legitimacy, and justification from some kind of initial agreement or contract, whether hypothetical or tacit, has been a mainstay of political philosophy, at least since Hobbes. Today, the leading approach to theorizing justice–John Rawls’ conception of “justice as fairness”– employs a contract doctrine, albeit of a somewhat modified kind. There, too, the idea is that an initial agreement, struck under special conditions of fairness, settles the principles of justice that will govern a society. The fundamental thought driving social contract theories is undeniably intuitive: What else could justify social rules and principles but the agreement of those who are to live under them? But, of course, there are fairly obvious problems with the very idea of a hypothetical prosocial fair agreement that results in principles and rules to govern actual societies. In Social Contract Theory for a Diverse World: Beyond Tolerance (Routledge, 2017), Ryan Muldoon (SUNY Buffalo) launches an original kind of criticism of social contract theory, both in its classical and current formulations. According to Muldoon, extant social contract theories do not take sufficient account of diversity. Muldoon then proposes a revised version of social contract theory, and also a reorientation in political philosophy itself. In Muldoon’s hands, social contract theory is not aimed primarily at the production and justification of principles of justice; rather, the social contract is a tool of discovery in an ongoing social experiment. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Welcome to show 5. Steve and Jeremy discuss Social Contract Theory, a proposed philosophical basis for the ultimate formation of governments. Please visit this and other podcasts and articles at http://www.2centplanet.com/

As many Conspirators know, we recently have engaged in a series of programs devoted to exposing the so-called "Social Contract Theory" for what it is: an excuse for majority-sanctioned theft and coercion. Here, we welcome frequent contributor and CABAL member, Stephen Smith, he of the excellent website "A Beginner's Guide to Freedom". In this production, Gardner Goldsmith and Stephen discuss a few of the contemporary figures espousing warmed-over "Social Contract Theory", and how all of the arguments in favor of it actually run counter to REAL contracts and real choice! Great stuff from Stephen. We love getting his insight! Be Seeing You!

Enjoy this punk rock refutation to the evil concept that you somehow subsume your individualism and self-ownership to the s-called "will of the people" as expressed by government/state law!! In this, the second (and better than the first, too!!) installment of the series on this issue, we go further than eviscerating Rousseau's silly notions, we show how so-called "social contract theory" is smeared all over other political work, including the supposedly laudable work of John Locke, upon whose ideas much of the US Constitution was based! Great material for a deep understanding of why the US government contained in it the seeds of expansion and greater an greater amounts of socialism. Be Seeing You!

Greetings, and welcome back to the Conspiracy! In this special program, we give you a short update of what's been happening in the Conspiracy Production Office, and then tell you how those events have inspired a study of one of the most noxious and destructive political theories in the history of man: Social Contract Theory. Gardner Goldsmith recounts an encounter with one of its true adherents, and asks you to offer your ideas through e-mail or at our website. Tell El G Grande how YOU would refute the believer in this evil socialist religion. Join us and spread the word! And enjoy the music of Plan B and the epic anti-authority song "Flowers", by the Psychedelic Furs! Be Seeing You!