Social Contract Argument Analysis
Summary
It is quite clear that the essay is intentionally biased, and in centered on proving that the Social contract is dictated by the state. The first argument was based on using the term provider to prove the point that the state defines the social contract. The objective was to prove that the Social contract was in the hands of the provider, in this instance Nelson Mandela that was looked upon as a provider, had the power to prioritize the truth and reconciliation process in south Africa (Ali-Dinar, 1994). The Second argument focused on difference and how that plays a role in what or who gets prioritized. Using the article written by Bruner (2015), one could focus on difference and prove not all people, is reflected in a social contract.
It is quite clear that the essay is intentionally biased, and in centered on proving that the Social contract is dictated by the state. The first argument was based on using the term provider to prove the point that the state defines the social contract. The objective was to prove that the Social contract was in the hands of the provider, in this instance Nelson Mandela that was looked upon as a provider, had the power to prioritize the truth and reconciliation process in south Africa (Ali-Dinar, 1994). The Second argument focused on difference and how that plays a role in what or who gets prioritized. Using the article written by Bruner (2015), one could focus on difference and prove not all people, is reflected in a social contract.