Best 11 quotes in «social contract quotes» category

Reading is at the beginning of the social contract.

Society doesn't officially recognize friendship as an institution in the way it recognizes sexual relationships, so there's no real protocol for ending one. If you've been going out, dating, or just sleeping with someone for even a month or two an you want to stop seeing him, you're expected to have a conversation with him letting him know it and giving him some bogus explanation. This conversation is seldom pleasant, and it ranges in tone from brittle adult adult discussions in coffee shops to armed standoffs in day care centers, but once it's over, you at least know your status. Because there's no formal etiquette for ending a friendship, most people do it in the laziest, most passive and painless way possible, by unilaterally dropping any effort to sustain it and letting the other person figure it out for themselves.

The right of conquest has no foundation other than the right of the strongest.

Defriending in't just unrecognized by some social oversight, it's protected by its own protocol, a code of silence. Demanding an explanation wouldn't just be undignified; it would violate the whole tacit contract on which friendship is founded. The same thing that makes friendship so valuable is what makes it so tenuous: it is purely voluntary. You enter into it freely, without the imperatives of biology or the agenda of desire. [...] Laura Kipnis's book Against Love: A Polemic includes a harrowing eight0page inventory of things people are not allowed to do because they're in romantic relationships, from going out without saying where you're going or when you'll be back to wearing that idiotic hat. But your best friend can move across the country without asking you.

İnsan bu sosyal sözleşmeyle birlikte “kutsallaştırılmıştır” ve bu “kutsallaştırılan” insanın yaptığı şey ise, aslına bakılırsa Tanrı’nın yerini gasp etmekten başka bir şey değildir.

Oamenii sunt răi; o tristă şi necontenită experienţă mă scuteşte de a o mai dovedi. Totuşi, omul este bun de la natură şi cred că am demonstrat acest lucru. Ce oare l-a putut deci deprava până într-atâta, dacă nu schimbările survenite în alcătuirea lui, progresele pe care le-a făcut, cunoştinţele pe care le-a dobândit? N-aveţi decât să admiraţi oricât poftiţi societatea omenească; nu va deveni mai puţin adevărat faptul că ea îi împinge în mod necesar pe oameni să se urască între ei pe măsură ce interesele lor se ciocnesc, să-şi aducă unii altora servicii aparente, făcându-şi de fapt tot răul ce se poate închipui. Ce se poate crede despre o societate unde raţiunea fiecărui individ îi dictează reguli direct contrare celor pe care raţiunea publică le predică ansamblului societăţii şi unde fiecare este interesat în nenorocirea altora? (...) Nu există poate nici un om bogat căruia nişte moştenitori lacomi, adesea chiar proprii lui copii, să nu-i dorească în taină moartea; poate nu există vas pe mare al cărui naufragiu să nu constituie o veste bună pentru un anumit neguţător; nu există poate nici o casă pe care un datornic rău de plată să nu dorească s-o vadă arzând împreună cu hârtiile aflate într-însa; şi care este poporul care nu se bucură de nenorocirile vecinilor?

Our social contract is becoming an exchange of free thought for mindless stimuli.

The Social Contract is, primarily, an inquiry into the legitimacy of power. But it is a book about rights, not about facts, and at no time is it a collection of sociological observations. It is concerned with principles and for this very reason is bound to be controversial. It presumes that traditional legitimacy, which is supposedly of divine origin, is not acquired. Thus it proclaims another sort of legitimacy and other principles. The Social Contract is also a catechism, of which it has both the tone and the dogmatic language. Just as 1789 completes the conquests of the English and American revolutions, so Rousseau pushes to its limits the theory of the social contract to be found in Hobbes. The Social Contract amplifies and dogmatically explains the new religion whose god is reason, confused with nature, and whose representative on earth, in place of the king, is the people considered as an expression of the general will.

There is nobody in this country who got rich on his own. Nobody. You built a factory out there? Good for you. But I want to be clear: You moved your goods to market on the roads the rest of us paid for. You hired workers the rest of us paid to educate. You were safe in your factory because of police forces and fire forces that the rest of us paid for. You didn't have to worry that marauding bands would come and seize everything at your factory, and hire someone to protect against this, because of the work the rest of us did. Now look, you built a factory and it turned into something terrific, or a great idea? God bless! Keep a big hunk of it. But part of the underlying social contract is you take a hunk of that and pay forward for the next kid who comes along.

The social contract known as 'The Constitution' has been null and void since the last person who signed it, died. Even then, it was only ever applicable to the men who signed it. That's how contracts work.

When you're a child, your best friend in the world is the kid who lives next door. It doesn't occur to you then that this is a matter of arbitrary circumstance. When you grow up you like to imagine that your friendships have a more substantial basis - common interests, like-mindedness, some genuine affinity. It's always a sad revelation that when a good friend acquires a girlfriend or a husband and disappears. You realize that,for them, your friendships was always only a matter of convenience, a fallback, and they simply don't need you anymore. There's nothing especially cynical about this; people are drawn to each other because they're giving each other something they both need, and they drift apart when they aren't getting it or don't need it anymore. Friendship have natural life spans, like love affairs or favorite songs.