But these arguments were based on a corporatist theory of Roman law, according to which “a populus” can exist as an autonomous legal entity. Thus, in these arguments, it has been argued that a group of people can join a government because it is capable of exercising a single will and making decisions with one voice, without sovereign authority – a concept rejected by Hobbes and the theorists of the treaty. In the early days of the cosmic cycle, humanity lived on an immaterial plane and danced on the air in a kind of fairytale country, where there was no need for food or clothing, and no private property, family, government or laws. Then, gradually, the process of cosmic decay began its work, and humanity became bound to the earth and felt the need for food and protection. When people lost their primitive fame, class differences emerged, and they made agreements between them and accepted the institution of private property and the family. With this theft began murder, adultery and other crimes, and so people came together and decided to appoint a man among them to maintain order in exchange for some of the produce from their fields and herds. He was called “the Great Elect” (Mahasammata), and he received the title of raja because it pleased the people.  It is perhaps not surprising that the revival of contemporary contact theory took place at the same time as the tools of game theory and especially the theory of negotiations were applied to philosophical problems. Negotiation theory, as developed by John Nash (1950) and John Harsanyi (1977), is a rigorous approach to modelling how rational individuals would agree to share something good or surplus. In its most general form, the negotiating model of the agreement defines a number of people who have individual utility functions that can be represented in relation to others, without the need to directly compare the benefits between individuals.
A quantity of goods or goods is indicated for the division and, if the persons concerned can agree on how to share the property in question, they will receive this distribution. However, if they fail to reach an agreement, they will instead disagree. That may be what they put on the table, or it could be another amount indicated. An example is a simple request game where two people have to write how much pot given they want. If the two “commandments” are equal or smaller than the pot, everyone receives what he or she wrote, otherwise everyone will have nothing. The social contract begins with Rousseau`s most frequently mentioned line: “Man was born free, and he is chained everywhere” (49). This requirement is the conceptual bridge between the descriptive work of the second speech and the temporary work to come. Humans are essentially free and free in the state of nature, but the “progress” of civilization has replaced submission to others with dependence, economic and social inequalities, and the extent to which we judge ourselves by comparisons with others.