Edmund Burke vs. Thomas Paine on the Social Contract

Introduction: The Social Contract in Political Thought

The concept of the social contract is one that has fascinated philosophers for centuries. It is also a concept that many organizations today adopt to help employees and managers function together in an optimally beneficial way. The exact elements of the social contract, however, tend to differ according to the specific ideology held by a society or group of people during a particular time — or, indeed, according to the individual ideology of each person. This divergence can be seen clearly in the widely different views held by Edmund Burke and Thomas Paine.

Burke's Organic View of Society and History

According to Burke, both history and the future play a very important role in how human beings are required to conduct their lives. The lessons of the past, according to the philosopher, serve as a guideline for the present in order to ensure sustainability for future generations. Based upon this philosophy, Burke's ideal is that the social contract refers to the agreement, or contract, between the people living in the present, those who have died, and those yet to be born.

Burke's view of society was of a large organic being, of which each human being is a part, much like a cell in a body. Society itself is thus seen as a self-perpetuating, living entity. If the cells within the body do not ensure this perpetuation, society will come to an end. Human beings are therefore to accept that they live temporarily as part of an eternal society. For this reason, it is vitally important that those currently living respect the traditions and wisdom of their ancestors. This accumulated wisdom, Burke argued, provides a better basis for action than abstract, disconnected reasoning.

Burke's Resistance to Radical Change

In his ideal of the social contract, Burke rebelled against the human tendency toward rapid and dynamic change. Such a paradigm disregards the past in order to create something entirely new — something based upon current needs rather than past wisdom or future sustainability. This approach, in Burke's view, disrespects the vital link between the human past, present, and future, and effectively voids the social contract. Burke argued that the cycle of destruction and rebuilding disrespects the past and its institutions, and is likely to end in societal chaos. Burke therefore advocates adherence to the past, because the past provides the roots upon which the future of society must be built.

Conclusion: Two Contrasting Visions of Society

In contrast to Burke, Paine's ideal focuses only on the present and on current social needs. Lessons from history are discarded in favor of frameworks that address the present rights and requirements of society. While Burke's social contract treats all of society across all time as an organic whole, Paine views society as composed of individual members whose political rights are paramount. These two thinkers thus represent fundamentally opposed visions of what the social contract means and whom it ultimately serves.