Why Natural Social Contracts Are Not Fair

The Sciences of Ethics and Political Philosophy Reading Group will get together on 14 January, at 16:30 [WET], to discuss a paper by Cailin O’Connor (2024), “Why Natural Social Contracts Are Not Fair” (pp. 123–140), in Michael Moehler & John Thrasher (Eds.), New Approaches to Social Contract Theory: Liberty, Equality, Diversity, and the Open Society, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press (https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198878650.003.0007). This session will have the confirmed presence of the author.

Abstract

Game theory has been employed to model the emergence of stable social norms, or natural “social contracts.” One branch of this literature uses bargaining games to show why many societies have norms and rules for fairness. In cultural evolutionary models, fair bargaining emerges endogenously, because it is an efficient way to divide resources. These models, however, miss an important element of real human societies—divisions into groups or social categories. Once these factors are added, fairness is no longer the expected outcome. Instead “discriminatory norms” often emerge where one group systematically gets more when dividing resources, which helps explain why categorical inequity is the rule in human societies. If one wishes to understand the naturalistic emergence of social contracts, one must account for the presence of categorical divisions, and unfairness, as well as for norms of fairness. This chapter overviews this body of work and considers its lessons for social contract theory.

Anyone interested in participating can send an email to Filipe Faria: filipefaria@fcsh.unl.pt.

The Sciences of Ethics and Political Philosophy Reading Group is an international monthly-assembling online reading group co-hosted by the CFCUL and the Ethics and Political Philosophy Lab (EPLab) of the IFILNOVA. More information about the group here.