Explain why "the divine right of kings" clashes with the idea of a social contract.

For many centuries, kings and rulers in general were thought to rule "by divine right." That is, their rule was God´s will. With economic progress in Europe and the spreading of new ideas, especially during the Enlightenment era, that belief was challenged. Kings or emperors were traditionally considered the sovereigns. The Enlightenment thinkers stated that all men should be equal before the law, and a state´s sovereignty lies in the people, not in a monarch´s will. Those thinkers - particularly Jean-Jacques Rousseau - said that the governed must express their consent to be be governed in a social contract.

Explanation:

"the divine right of kings" justifies royalty and power of kings in terms of its supranatural or divine nature. From such a perspective power of kings is derived from divine power. Idea of social contract is a product of secular or profane political thought where social power is not conceived as divine.

Explanation: concept of divine rights of kings is as old as literate society (Sumerian epics like Enuma Elish mention power of kings as divine power) whereas idea of social contract (Hobbes, Locke etc.) is a product of increasingly secular society.

it's a secular holiday. it is and was a custom developed to recognize the ending of a time and a wish for a good future. the kind of kiss you exchange, if you are single, is intended to predict what kind of year you will have in the coming year.

it is saying good bye to the last year with all its ups and downs, and hello to the new year, with all its hopes and dreams.

in his book, the riddle of the rosetta stone, james giblin talks about how there was a young british polymath and physician named thomas young who made a lot of advances on the deciphering of the rosetta stone. he says that even though young made a lot of mistakes because he was working under false assumptions, he also made huge contributions like deciphering three out of the seven symbols (more than anyone else before him). young published his findings and continued his good work but he wasn't able to progress much further due to some unfavorable situations, he still laid the basis for many other scholars and of course for the man who has been generally known to have deciphered it, jean-françois champollion