The Social Contract and the Myth of Amoralism

Summary

Michele Moody-Adams' central thesis in "The Social Contract and the Myth of Amoralism" is that ostensibly amoral claims within social contract theory, particularly those concerning self-interest, are often deeply infused with moral assumptions that justify existing social and political inequalities. She argues that classical social contract thinkers, by presenting individuals as purely self-interested agents, inadvertently legitimize certain forms of coercion and domination by framing them as necessary for maintaining social order. This overlooks the inherent moral dimensions of social interaction and the ways in which such theories can perpetuate injustice.

The book's key ideas include the critique of the "myth of amoralism" as a philosophical construct that masks moral commitments, the analysis of how purportedly neutral theories of justice can serve partisan interests, and the re-examination of social contract principles through a lens that acknowledges the pervasive influence of moral values in shaping political thought. Readers gain a critical understanding of how abstract political theories can have concrete, often inequitable, real-world consequences, and how to identify the hidden moral frameworks embedded within seemingly objective arguments.

Full text isn't indexed yet — this overview draws on general knowledge of the book and its metadata, and chat works the same way.

Key concepts

• Myth of Amoralism — The idea that self-interest, when applied to political and social arrangements, can be understood and acted upon without reference to morality.
• Moral Neutrality in Social Contract Theory — The argument that social contract theories can be constructed from a position of moral impartiality, focusing solely on rational self-preservation.
• Justification of Inequality — How purportedly amoral contractual arguments can implicitly endorse existing social hierarchies and power imbalances.
• Ideological Function of Social Contract Theory — The examination of how these theories can serve to legitimize or critique existing social and political structures.