Search

Copyright of Management international / International Management / Gestiòn Internacional is the property of Management International and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

By making the individual rights the anthropological premise of society, modernity subverted the essence of the common good which is now defined with regard to individual aspirations. The general interest can no longer be regarded as an end. Rather it is a means that reconciles individual rights and personal interests through the social contract. Therefore the project of a general interest complying with both individual rights and personal interests is compromised by their original reciprocity. Studying Hobbes and Locke, who focus respectively on general utility of society and on justice, allows us to understand that two radically different political philosophies emerge whether the author prioritizes one or the other when aiming at defining the general interest. As on the one hand the satisfaction of personal interests may threaten individual rights while on the other hand the protection of those rights tends to organize personal interests into a hierarchy, this paper discusses the dichotomous nature of the general interest which might explain why this notion is so hard to comprehend today.