M is the deliberative framework; rules, principles or institutions R; I the (hypothetical) people in the original position or the state of nature who enter into the social contract; and I are the individuals in the real world who follow the social contract.  The unwritten «social contract» keeps society in motion, as Jon Pike explains, second, the social theories of the contract are drawn from certain representations of the parties to have the electoral situation determined. However, this objective of the determinants may have the effect of eliminating the pluralism of the parties in the first place, which was the initial impetus of the treaty. In his lectures on the history of political philosophy, Rawls says that «the normalization of party interests» is «with social-contractual doctrines» and that it is necessary to unite the perspectives of the various parties to build a «common position» (2007, 226). Here, Rawls seems to suggest that it is necessary to «normalize» the parties` prospects in order to obtain determination in the contractual proceedings. You say that it is naturally good to do injustice; To suffer injustice, evil; but that evil is greater than good. And if people have done wrong and suffered wrongs and experienced both, have not been able to avoid one and get the other, they think they better agree with each other that they have neither; As a result, laws and mutual alliances are emerging; and what is ordered by law is described by them as legitimate and just. They confirm it as the origin and nature of justice; – it is one way or another, between the best of all, which is to do injustice and not be punished, and the worst of all which is to suffer injustice without the power of retaliation; and justice, which is at the centre of both, is not tolerated as a good, but as a lesser evil and honored by the inability of men to do harm. For no one worthy of being called a human being would ever submit to such an arrangement if he could resist; He would be crazy if he did.
This is the Socrates report on the nature and origin of justice.  [The social contract] can be reduced to the following terms: each of us pools our person and all our power under the supreme authority of the general will; and in one body we receive each limb as an indivisible part of the whole.  The other view is that, even after we have clarified the parties (including their rationality, values and information), they still disagree as to their priorities for potential partnership contracts. From this point of view, the treaty has an undetermined result only if it is possible to agree to the different rankings of each (D`Agostino 2003). We can distinguish four fundamental agreements. According to Locke, the state of nature is not a condition of the individual, as is the case with Hobbes.