o disorder and war, and will certainly not lead to a peaceful order and good government. . Hobbes clearly realizes that if a contractual relationship exists between a sovereign and his subjects, then it becomes essential to establish higher laws to regulate the ruler's actions, and the subjects then have the right of interpretation or review. But it is not possible to guarantee a uniformity of agreement in the determination of the sovereign's performance; whether or not he is acting in accordance with the goals and objectives authorized by the subjects. Failure to agree will lead inevitably to quarrels and infighting and, in his opinion, to warfare and a return to the conditions that obtain in the state of nature.. Hobbes has be criticized for a number of reasons. One of the more prevalent reasons is that his argument cannot show that people, as he describes them, would institute what he defines as an absolute sovereign.' Therefore, some argue that Hobbes's social contract is invalid for the reasons summarized below. First, the creation of an absolute sovereign, according to Hobbes, is necessary to secure peace and harmony in civil society or the commonwealth. The sovereign is defined as one who is the absolute master of all his subjects, and that he is the final arbiter of all questions in the commonwealth. The sovereign decides whether or not he, or his successor, will continue in power - a power that will be permanent. Second, the subjects in the commonwealth empower a ruler by accepting and obeying his punishment commands. Their obedience, which they decide, must therefore, and of necessity, be in their best interests and their welfare.Third, from the second premise it can be seen that the sovereign, who is created by the people, as subjects, does not decide for them the fundamental questions of acceptance of, and obedience to, his commands, including his punishment commands. Fourth, it therefore follows from the third premise that ...
