Wednesday, July 25, 2012
A Social Contract?
There is only one possible coherent meaning of the phrase, "social contract"; that an individual possessing a rational-consciousness (or possessed by?) must necessarily be agreed to treat other persons, manifesting rational-behavior, as if they were individuals possessing rational-consciousness of their own. If this is acknowledged/agreed-to, then this would imply that these other individuals possessing rational-consciousness may not be interacted with as merely means to one's own ends, but as individuals possessing their own ends; that they must be interacted with on a rational-basis of negotiation, trade/exchange, and perhaps even friendship; a person not assenting to this form of the "social contract" is certainly rationally-free to do so, but to deny the rational-consciousness of others, implies the acceptance, that the one denying the rational-consciousness of all others, is the only rational-consciousness in existence, and therefore for such a person, there can be there is no society, nor contract (for who would exist, in this person's apprehension, with which they could contract with?); for such a person who denies the rational-consciousness of others, they accept no other person their ethical-equal and thereby they must see this world at best, as being inhabited by intelligent monkeys, but no human-beings.