Who Said This Social Organization Is A General Social Agreement

Any thought involves reactions, because the reaction is the only possible basis for the conscious process. It is possible that individuals think in reactions that are consciously meaningful only to themselves; which are not linguistic reactions in the strict or broad sense of the term, but which, to the extent that they serve the same purpose in thought as in linguistic terms, are sometimes called by the same name. These reactions can be characterized as idiolingue reactions and their irritating patterns (muscle patterns resulting from previous reactions) can be characterized as idio language, so that notions of language and linguistic reaction can be limited to their true meaning as models of social stimuli and their reactions to social patterns. [4] Carole Pateman`s 1988 book, The Sexual Contract, argues that extending under the myth of the idealized contract described by Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau is a more fundamental contract on the relationship between men and women. Contract theory presents itself as an adversary of patriarchy and patriarchal law. (Locke`s social contract, for example, is put by him in opposition to the work of Robert Filmer, who argued for patriarchal power.) But the “pact of origin” (2), which precedes the social contract on an equal footing, is the agreement of men to dominate and control women. This “pact of origin” is concluded by brothers, literally or metaphorically, who, after the fall of the Father`s reign, agree to share their domination over women who were previously under the exclusive control of a man, the Father. The transition from “classical patriarchy” (24) to modern patriarchy is therefore a change that has power over women. However, the question of whether women are dominated by men is not a fundamental change. Men`s power relations with each other change, but the relationship between women and the power of men does not change. Modern patriarchy is characterized by a contractual relationship between men, and part of this treaty involves power over women. This fact that one form of patriarchy was not completely reversed, but was replaced by another form in which male power was distributed among more men instead of being held by a man, is illustrated by Freud`s story about the birth of civilization. After this story, a gang of brothers, run by a father who kept exclusive sexual access to the women of the tribe, kill the father, and then form a contract between them to be equal and share the women.

This is the story, whether we understand Freud`s history as historically correct or not, of modern patriarchy and its deep dependence on the treaty as the means by which men control and dominate women. The starting point of most theories of societal contracts is a study of the human condition without a political order (described by Thomas Hobbes as the “natural state”). [4] In this state, the individual`s actions are related only to his personal power and conscience. From this common starting point, social contract theorists try to demonstrate why rational individuals would willingly agree to give up their natural freedom in order to obtain the benefits of political order.